Abstract: Purpose: A surface electronic brachytherapy (EBT) device is in fact an x-ray source collimated with specific applicators. Low-energy (<100 kVp) x-ray beam dosimetry faces several challenges that need to be addressed. A number of calibration protocols have been published for x-ray beam dosimetry. The media in which measurements are performed are the fundamental difference between them. The aim of this study was to evaluate the surface dose rate of a low-energy x-ray source with small field applicators using different calibration standards and different small-volume ionization chambers, comparing the values and uncertainties of each methodology. Methods: The surface dose rate of the EBT unit Esteya (Elekta Brachytherapy, The Netherlands), a 69.5 kVp x-ray source with applicators of 10, 15, 20, 25, and 30 mm diameter, was evaluated using the AAPM TG-61 (based on air kerma) and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) TRS-398 (based on absorbed dose to water) dosimetry protocols for low-energy photon beams. A plane parallel T34013 ionization chamber (PTW Freiburg, Germany) calibrated in terms of both absorbed dose to water and air kerma was used to compare the two dosimetry protocols. Another PTW chamber of the same model was used to evaluate the reproducibility between these chambers. Measurements were also performed with two different Exradin A20 (Standard Imaging, Inc., Middleton, WI) chambers calibrated in terms of air kerma. Results: Differences between surface dose rates measured in air and in water using the T34013 chamber range from 1.6% to 3.3%. No field size dependence has been observed. Differences are below 3.7% when measurements with the A20 and the T34013 chambers calibrated in air are compared. Estimated uncertainty (with coverage factor k = 1) for the T34013 chamber calibrated in water is 2.2%-2.4%, whereas it increases to 2.5% and 2.7% for the A20 and T34013 chambers calibrated in air, respectively. The output factors, measured with the PTW chambers, differ by less than 1.1% for any applicator size when compared to the output factors that were measured with the A20 chamber. Conclusions: Measurements using both dosimetric protocols are consistent, once the overall uncertainties are considered. There is also consistency between measurements performed with both chambers calibrated in air. Both the T34013 and A20 chambers have negligible stem effect. Any x-ray surface brachytherapy system, including Esteya, can be characterized using either one of these calibration protocols and ionization chambers. Having less correction factors, lower uncertainty, and based on measurements, performed in closer to clinical conditions, the TRS-398 protocol seems to be the preferred option.

Abstract: Purpose: High dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy for treatment of small skin lesions using the Leipzig and Valencia applicators is a widely used technique. These applicators are equipped with an attachable plastic cap to be placed during fraction delivery to ensure electronic equilibrium and to prevent secondary electrons from reaching the skin surface. The purpose of this study is to report on the dosimetric impact of the cap being absent during HDR fraction delivery, which has not been explored previously in the literature. Methods: GEANT4 Monte Carlo simulations (version 10.0) have been performed for the Leipzig and Valencia applicators with and without the plastic cap. In order to validate the Monte Carlo simulations, experimental measurements using radiochromic films have been done. Results: Dose absorbed within 1 mm of the skin surface increases by a factor of 1500% for the Leipzig applicators and of 180% for the Valencia applicators. Deeper than 1 mm, the overdosage flattens up to a 10% increase. Conclusions: Differences of treating with or without the plastic cap are significant. Users must check always that the plastic cap is in place before any treatment in order to avoid overdosage of the skin. Prior to skin HDR fraction delivery, the timeout checklist should include verification of the cap placement. (C) 2016 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

Abstract: Purpose: The purpose of this study is to validate the PenRed Monte Carlo framework for clinical applications in brachytherapy. PenRed is a C++ version of Penelope Monte Carlo code with additional tallies and utilities. Methods and materials: Six benchmarking scenarios are explored to validate the use of PenRed and its improved bachytherapy-oriented capabilities for HDR brachytherapy. A new tally allowing the evaluation of collisional kerma for any material using the track length kerma estimator and the possibility to obtain the seed positions, weights and directions processing directly the DICOM file are now implemented in the PenRed distribution. The four non-clinical test cases developed by the Joint AAPM-ESTRO-ABG-ABS WG-DCAB were evaluated by comparing local and global absorbed dose differences with respect to established reference datasets. A prostate and a palliative lung cases, were also studied. For them, absorbed dose ratios, global absorbed dose differences, and cumulative dose-volume histograms were obtained and discussed. Results: The air-kerma strength and the dose rate constant corresponding to the two sources agree with the reference datatests within 0.3% (Sk) and 0.1% (K). With respect to the first three WG-DCAB test cases, more than 99.8% of the voxels present local (global) differences within +/- 1%(+/- 0.1%) of the reference datasets. For test Case 4 reference dataset, more than 94.9%(97.5%) of voxels show an agreement within +/- 1%(+/- 0.1%), better than similar benchmarking calculations in the literature. The track length kerma estimator scorer implemented increases the numerical efficiency of brachytherapy calculations two orders of magnitude, while the specific brachytherapy source allows the user to avoid the use of error-prone intermediate steps to translate the DICOM information into the simulation. In both clinical cases, only minor absorbed dose differences arise in the low-dose isodoses. 99.8% and 100% of the voxels have a global absorbed dose difference ratio within +/- 0.2%for the prostate and lung cases, respectively. The role played by the different segmentation and composition material in the bone structures was discussed, obtaining negligible absorbed dose differ-ences. Dose-volume histograms were in agreement with the reference data.Conclusions: PenRed incorporates new tallies and utilities and has been validated for its use for detailed and precise high-dose-rate brachytherapy simulations.