Cargando…

Effects of iodinated contrast agent on HU-based dose calculation and dose delivered in iridium-192 high-dose-rate brachytherapy

PURPOSE: This study compares the effect of iodinated contrast agent on Hounsfield unit (HU)-based TG-186 dose calculation vs. delivered dose for high-dose-rate (HDR) iridium-192 brachytherapy using a phantom model. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A reservoir filled with a diluted contrast agent was placed ins...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Scherf, Christian, Ramm, Ulla, Stein, Thomas, Trommel, Martin, Tselis, Nikolaos, Chatzikonstantinou, Georgios, Diefenhardt, Markus, Rödel, Claus, Köhn, Janett, Licher, Jörg
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Termedia Publishing House 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8867231/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35233239
http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/jcb.2022.113551
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: This study compares the effect of iodinated contrast agent on Hounsfield unit (HU)-based TG-186 dose calculation vs. delivered dose for high-dose-rate (HDR) iridium-192 brachytherapy using a phantom model. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A reservoir filled with a diluted contrast agent was placed inside a water phantom. A single steel needle applicator was centrally positioned inside the reservoir. Computed tomography (CT) datasets of five different contrast agent dilutions (25 to 300 mg/ml iodine concentration) were acquired, and dose calculations were performed with TG-186 ACE dose calculation formalism of Oncentra(®)Brachy (Elekta). The dose was measured with a PinPoint(®) ionization chamber (PTW) inside the contrast agent. ACE calculated and measured data were compared. RESULTS: For the different contrast agent dilutions, averaged Hounsfield units from 453 ±21 to 2623 ±221 were obtained. Electron densities derived from CT data were significantly higher than corresponding electron densities calculated from chemical compositions. Consequently, the measured dose was higher than corresponding HU-based calculated dose. Relative deviation ranged from 2.5% to 7% per 10 mm penetration depth, depending on contrast agent concentration. CONCLUSIONS: The application of HU-based TG-186 dose formalisms in the presence of high-Z contrast agent bulks overestimates electron densities. Consequently, HU-based dose calculations result in a higher delivered dose than expected from the treatment planning system.