Vol 20, No 3 (2015)
Original research articles
Published online: 2015-05-01

open access

Page views 249
Article views/downloads 257
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

A Monte Carlo study on dose distribution evaluation of Flexisource Ir brachytherapy source

Majid Alizadeh1, Mahdi Ghorbani2, Abbas Haghparast1, Naser Zare3, Toktam Ahmadi Moghaddas4
DOI: 10.1016/j.rpor.2015.01.006
Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2015;20(3):204-209.

Abstract

Aim

The aim of this study is to evaluate the dose distribution of the Flexisource 192Ir source.

Background

Dosimetric evaluation of brachytherapy sources is recommended by task group number 43 (TG. 43) of American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM).

Materials and methods

MCNPX code was used to simulate Flexisource 192Ir source. Dose rate constant and radial dose function were obtained for water and soft tissue phantoms and compared with previous data on this source. Furthermore, dose rate along the transverse axis was obtained by simulation of the Flexisource and a point source and the obtained data were compared with those from Flexiplan treatment planning system (TPS).

Results

The values of dose rate constant obtained for water and soft tissue phantoms were equal to 1.108 and 1.106, respectively. The values of the radial dose function are listed in the form of tabulated data. The values of dose rate (cGy/s) obtained are shown in the form of tabulated data and figures. The maximum difference between TPS and Monte Carlo (MC) dose rate values was 11% in a water phantom at 6.0[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]cm from the source.

Conclusion

Based on dosimetric parameter comparisons with values previously published, the accuracy of our simulation of Flexisource 192Ir was verified. The results of dose rate constant and radial dose function in water and soft tissue phantoms were the same for Flexisource and point sources. For Flexisource 192Ir source, the results of TPS calculations in a water phantom were in agreement with the simulations within the calculation uncertainties. Furthermore, the results from the TPS calculation for Flexisource and MC calculation for a point source were practically equal within the calculation uncertainties.

Article available in PDF format

View PDF Download PDF file