Comparison of 3D dose distributions for HDR {sup 192}Ir brachytherapy sources with normoxic polymer gel dosimetry and treatment planning system

Radiation fluence changes caused by the dosimeter itself and poor spatial resolution may lead to lack of 3-dimensional (3D) information depending on the features of the dosimeter and quality assurance of dose distributions for high–dose rate (HDR) iridium-192 ({sup 192}Ir) brachytherapy sources is challenging and experimental dosimetry methods used for brachytherapy sources are limited. In this study, we investigated 3D dose distributions of {sup 192}Ir brachytherapy sources for irradiation with single and multiple dwell positions using a normoxic gel dosimeter and compared them with treatment planning system (TPS) calculations. For dose calibration purposes, 100-mL gel-containing vials were irradiated at predefined doses and then scanned in an magnetic resonance (MR) imaging unit. Gel phantoms prepared in 2 spherical glasses were irradiated with {sup 192}Ir for the calculated dwell positions, and MR scans of the phantoms were obtained. The images were analyzed with MATLAB software. Dose distributions and profiles derived with 1-mm resolution were compared with TPS calculations. Linearity was observed between the delivered dose and the reciprocal of the T2 relaxation time constant of the gel. The x-, y-, and z-axes were defined as the sagittal, coronal, and axial planes, respectively, the sagittal and axial planes were defined parallel to the long axis of the source while the coronal plane was defined horizontally to the long axis of the source. The differences between measured and calculated profile widths of 3-cm source length and point source for 70%, 50%, and 30% isodose lines were evaluated at 3 dose levels using 18 profiles of comparison. The calculations for 3-cm source length revealed a difference of > 3 mm in 1 coordinate at 50% profile width on the sagittal plane and 3 coordinates at 70% profile width and 2 coordinates at 50% and 30% profile widths on the axial plane. Calculations on the coronal plane for 3-cm source length showed > 3-mm difference in 1 coordinate at 50% and 70% and 2 coordinates at 30% profile widths. The point source measurements and calculations for 50% profile widths revealed a difference > 3 mm in 1 coordinate on the sagittal plane and 2 coordinates on the axial plane. The doses of 3 coordinates on the sagittal plane and 4 coordinates on the axial plane could not be evaluated in 30% profile width because of low doses. There was good agreement between the gel dosimetry and TPS results. Gel dosimetry provides dose distribution