ABSTRACT
The objective for this work was to develop a commissioning methodology for the treatment delivery components of the AccuBoost system, as well as to establish a routine quality assurance program and appropriate guidance for clinical use based on the commissioning results. Various tests were developed: 1) assessment of the accuracy of the displayed separation value; 2) validation of the dwell positions within each applicator; 3) assessment of the accuracy and precision of the applicator localization system; 4) assessment of the combined dose profile of two opposed applicators to confirm that they are coaxial; 5) measurement of the absolute dose delivered with each applicator to confirm acceptable agreement with dose based on Monte Carlo modeling; 6) measurements of the skin-to-center dose ratio using optically stimulated luminescence dosimeters; and 7) assessment of the mammopad cushion's effect on the center dose. We found that the difference between the measured and the actual paddle separation is < 0.1 cm for the separation range of 3 cm to 7.5 cm. Radiochromic film measurements demonstrated that the number of dwell positions inside the applicators agree with the values from the vendor, for each applicator type and size. The shift needed for a good applicator-grid alignment was within 0.2 cm. The dry-run test using film demonstrated that the shift of the dosimetric center is within 0.15 cm. Dose measurements in water converted to polystyrene agreed within 5.0% with the Monte Carlo data in polystyrene for the same applicator type, size, and depth. A solid water-to-water (phantom) factor was obtained for each applicator, and all future annual quality assurance tests will be performed in solid water using an average value of 1.07 for the solid water-to-water factor. The skin-to-center dose ratio measurements support the Monte Carlo-based values within 5.0% agreement. For the treatment separation range of 4 cm to 8cm, the change in center dose would be < 1.0% for all applicators when using a compressed pad of 0.2 cm to 0.3 cm. The tests performed ensured that all treatment components of the AccuBoost system are functional and that a treatment plan can be delivered with acceptable accuracy. Based on the commissioning results, a quality assurance manual and guidance documents for clinical use were developed.
Subject(s)
Brachytherapy , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Phantoms, Imaging , Quality Assurance, Health Care , Radiometry/instrumentation , Radiotherapy, Image-Guided/instrumentation , Computer Simulation , Female , Humans , Iridium Radioisotopes/therapeutic use , Mammography , Monte Carlo Method , Particle Accelerators/instrumentation , Radiotherapy Dosage , Skin/radiation effectsABSTRACT
To retrospectively review our first 20 Contura high dose rate breast cases to improve and refine our standardized procedure and checklists. We prepared in advance checklists for all steps, developed an in-house Excel spreadsheet for second checking the plan, and generated a procedure for efficient contouring and a set of optimization constraints to meet the dose volume histogram criteria. Templates were created in our treatment planning system for structures, isodose levels, optimization constraints, and plan report. This study reviews our first 20 high dose rate Contura breast treatment plans. We followed our standardized procedure for contouring, planning, and second checking. The established dose volume histogram criteria were successfully met for all plans. For the cases studied here, the balloon-skin and balloon-ribs distances ranged between 5 and 43 mm and 1 and 33 mm, respectively; air_seroma volume/PTV_Eval volume≤5.5% (allowed≤10%); asymmetry<1.2mm (goal≤2 mm); PTV_Eval V90%≥97.6%; PTV_Eval V95%≥94.9%; skin max dose≤98%Rx; ribs max dose≤137%Rx; V150%≤29.8 cc; V200%≤7.8 cc; the total dwell time range was 225.4 to 401.9 seconds; and the second check agreement was within 3%. Based on this analysis, more appropriate ranges for the total dwell time and balloon diameter tolerance were found. Three major problems were encountered: balloon migration toward the skin for small balloon-to-skin distances, lumen obstruction, and length change for the flexible balloon. Solutions were found for these issues and our standardized procedure and checklists were updated accordingly. Based on our review of these cases, the use of checklists resulted in consistent results, indicating good coverage for the target without sacrificing the critical structures. This review helped us to refine our standardized procedure and update our checklists.
