S113
Brachytherapy - Physics
ESTRO 2026
Keywords: FMEA, catheter reconstruction, planning References: 1. DGMP-Bericht Nr. 28: Eine Durchführungshilfe zur Umsetzung des Risikomanagements für die Strahlenbehandlung gemäß § 126 StrlSchV: Prozessbasierter Ansatz, 2024.2. M.S. Huq, B.A. Fraass, P.B. Dunscombe, J.P. Gibbons Jr., G.S. Ibbott, A.J. Mundt, et al. The report of Task Group 100 of the AAPM: application of risk analysis methods to radiation therapy quality management. Med Phys, 43 (7) (2016)3. A.L. Holtman, D.J. DiCostanzo, C.A. Zimmerman, G. Graeper, J. Woollard, D.F. Christ, A.J. Cetnar Comparison of failure modes and effects analyses and time for brachytherapy ring and tandem applicator digitization between manual and solid applicator source placement methods. J Appl Clin Med Phys, 25 (5) (2024) Digital Poster Highlight 169 User expectations and current availability of HDR brachytherapy audits in Europe Laura Oliver-Cañamás 1 , Javier Vijande 2 , Cristian Candela-Juan 3 , Jose Perez-Calatayud 4 1 Servei de Radiofísica i Protecció Radiològica, Consorci Hospitalari Provincial de Castelló, Castelló, Spain. 2 Departamento de Física Atómica, Molecular y Nuclear, Universitat de València, València, Spain. 3 Radiation Oncology Department, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. 4 Radiotherapy Department, Hospital Clínica Benidorm, Alicante, Spain Purpose/Objective: The aim of this work was to evaluate the need to implement more dosimetric audits in high dose rate brachytherapy (HDR BT) in Europe, as well as identifying the characteristics that such audits should meet according to the users’ community. Material/Methods: A survey consisting of 30 multiple-choice questions was designed and distributed among European centers. The questionnaire was developed using Google Forms, with an estimated completion time of less than 15 minutes. It was disseminated through European professional societies, mailing lists, and vendor networks. The survey collected data on center characteristics and procedures, previous audit participation, users’ perspectives on desirable audit features, and opinions on whether current audit services are sufficient or whether more services are needed. Responses were anonymized, and only one entry per institution was retained. Results: Seventy-four European centers responded, mainly represented by medical physicists. The distribution of nationalities is shown in Figure 1. The vast majority
(95%) used 192Ir sources, while only 3% reported 60Co and 3% electronic BT. Regarding audit services, 61% of the users suggested that dosimetry audits in HDR BT should be recommended but not mandatory, whereas 35% considered them necessary and compulsory. Only 4% of respondents thought that such audits are not required. However, only 14% reported having access to one, typically through pilot or research initiatives rather than established programs. In contrast, 86% of users found that the number and type of HDR BT audits currently available is inadequate and that more national and/or international services are needed. Notably, 99% of the participants declared that they would participate in an HDR BT dosimetry audit if they had the opportunity.Aspects that an HDR BT dosimetry audit should ideally satisfy according to users are summarized in Table 1, covering aspects to be tested, frequency, time requirements, and technical conditions.
Figure 1. Distribution of centers according to nationalities.Table 1: Aspects that an HDR BT dosimetry audit should ideally satisfy according to participants
Made with FlippingBook - Share PDF online