Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 18, 2026
Irradiator Commissioning and Dosimetry for Assessment of LQ α and β Parameters, Radiation Dosing Schema, and in vivo Dose Deposition
Published on: March 11, 2021
Experimental and computational dosimetry in an integrated workflow for remote audits in Ir-192 interstitial
Eleftherios P Pappas1, Vasiliki Peppa1,2, Alexandra Drakopoulou1
1Medical Physics Laboratory, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Purpose:
This work presents the development and pilot implementation of a comprehensive remote (postal) dosimetry audit for Ir-192 High Dose Rate interstitial brachytherapy, integrating independent experimental and computational dosimetry procedures into a unified workflow.
Methods:
A compact, water-equivalent phantom was designed to accommodate two plastic catheters, ten Optically Stimulated Luminescent Dosimeters (OSLDs), and two radiochromic films, allowing for independent point-approximating and 2D dose measurements. In the pilot study, a user-selected treatment plan (36 source dwell positions) was generated using a clinical Treatment Planning System (TPS), after considering the optimal dose range of the dosimeters. By analyzing the DICOM-RT files, a computational dosimetry audit test was also performed using Monte Carlo (MC) simulations, enabling independent 3D dose calculations for the same plan and phantom geometry. All dosimetry results were compared to TPS calculations (TG43 and a Model-Based Dose Calculation Algorithm, MBDCA) using the 3D Gamma Index (GI) test, dose difference maps, and dose-volume histogram comparisons, wherever applicable. All procedures were designed for a minimum clinical workload burden.
Results:
The pilot study was completed within 10 days of phantom delivery to the clinical site. If necessary, measurements were corrected by applying appropriate correction factors determined by conducting side studies. GI passing criteria were adapted to the uncertainty of each dosimetry system. Excellent agreement between MBDCA dose predictions and experimental or MC results was observed. Within the volume of interest, a systematic overestimation by TG43 relative to MC results (median difference: +2.16%) was attributed to missing scatter conditions and phantom material.
Conclusion:
Despite the labor-intensive workflow for the auditing institution, the developed protocol is suitable for remote Ir-192 audits with acceptable uncertainties. Combining experimental and computational methods strengthens the reliability of audit outcomes. Overall results of this work highlight the advantages of an integrated dosimetry protocol for comprehensive and rigorous auditing programs.
