In vivo dose verification method in catheter based high dose rate brachytherapy

•IVD with TLD “rods” was applied to assess individual brachytherapy treatment doses.•IVD control method applied in routine for dose verification in HDR brachytherapy.•Recalculation of dosimeter locations according to repeated CT scans is necessary.•Combination of this method with another IVD control methods suggested.•Delivered dose accuracy and precision during patient’s treatment is relevant. In vivo dosimetry is a powerful tool for dose verification in radiotherapy. Its application in high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy is usually limited to the estimation of gross errors, due to inability of the dosimetry system/ method to record non-uniform dose distribution in steep dose gradient fields close to the radioactive source. In vivo dose verification in interstitial catheter based HDR brachytherapy is crucial since the treatment is performed inserting radioactive source at the certain positions within the catheters that are pre-implanted into the tumour. We propose in vivo dose verification method for this type of brachytherapy treatment which is based on the comparison between experimentally measured and theoretical dose values calculated at well-defined locations corresponding dosemeter positions in the catheter. Dose measurements were performed using TLD 100-H rods (6 mm long, 1 mm diameter) inserted in a certain sequences into additionally pre-implanted dosimetry catheter. The adjustment of dosemeter positioning in the catheter was performed using reconstructed CT scans of patient with pre-implanted catheters. Doses to three Head&Neck and one Breast cancer patient have been measured during several randomly selected treatment fractions. It was found that the average experimental dose error varied from 4.02% to 12.93% during independent in vivo dosimetry control measurements for selected Head&Neck cancer patients and from 7.17% to 8.63% - for Breast cancer patient. Average experimental dose error was below the AAPM recommended margin of 20% and did not exceed the measurement uncertainty of 17.87% estimated for this type of dosemeters. Tendency of slightly increasing average dose error was observed in every following treatment fraction of the same patient. It was linked to the changes of theoretically estimated dosemeter positions due to the possible patient’s organ movement between different treatment fractions, since catheter reconstruction was performed for the first treatment fraction only. These findings indicate potential for further average dose err