Abstract
After 2010, the source model of the microSelectron HDR Afterloader System was slightly modified from the previous model. Granero et al. named the modified source model “mHDR-v2r (revised model mHDR-v2)” and the previous model “mHDR-v2”. They concluded that the dosimetric differences arising from the dimensional changes between the mHDR-v2 and mHDR-v2r designs were negligible at almost all locations (within 0.5% for r ≥ 0.25 cm), the two-dimensional anisotropy function difference between the two sources is found 2.1% at r = 1.0 cm when compared with the results of the other experimental group. To confirm this difference, we performed a full Monte Carlo simulation without energy-fluence approximation. This is useful near the radiation source where charged-particle equilibrium does not hold. The two-dimensional anisotropy function of the TG-43U1 dataset showed a few percent difference between the mHDR-v2r and mHDR-v2 sources. There was no agreement in the immediate vicinity of the source (0.10 cm and 0.25 cm), when compared to Granero et al. in mHDR-v2r sources. The differences in these two-dimensional anisotropy functions were identified.
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Reference21 articles.
1. Update of AAPM Task Group No. 43 Report: A revised AAPM protocol for brachytherapy dose calculations;MJ Rivard;Med Phys,2004
2. Monte Carlo and experimental high dose rate 192Ir brachytherapy dosimetry with microDiamond detectors;G Rossi;Z Med Phys,2019
3. Determination of the dose rate around a HDR 192Ir brachytherapy source with the microDiamond and the microSilicon detector;G Rossi;Z Med Phys,2022
4. Determination of the dose rate around a HDR 192Ir brachytherapy source with the microDiamond and the microSilicon detector;A Rostam;Rep Pract Oncol Radiother,2019
5. Monte Carlo simulation and dosimetry measurements of an experimental approach for in vitro HDR brachytherapy irradiation;JM Geraldo;Appl Radiat Isot,2021