Oike, T., Ohno, T., Noda, S.E., Kiyohara, H., Ando, K., Shibuya, K., et al. (2014) Can Combined Intracavitary/Interstitial Approach Be an Alternative to Interstitial Brachytherapy with the Martinez Universal Perineal Interstitial Template (MUPIT) in Computed Tomography-Guided Adaptive Brachytherapy for Bulky and/or Irregularly Shaped Gynecological Tumors? Radiation Oncology, 9, 222.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13014-014-0222-6

has been cited by the following article:

• TITLE: An In-Vivo Study during Combined Intracavitary and Interstitial Brachytherapy of Gynaecological Malignancies Using microMOSFET

  AUTHORS: Ramapandian Seenisamy, Vivekanandan Nagarajan, Ashutosh Mukherji, Parthasarathy Vedasoundaram, K. S. Reddy, Vivekanandam Singhavajala, Vijayaprabhu Neelakandan

  KEYWORDS: microMOSFET, Intra-Fraction Variations in Brachytherapy, Inter-Fraction Variations in Brachytherapy, Combined Intracavitary and Interstitial Brachytherapy, In-Vivo Dosimetry in Brachytherapy, Applicator Displacement, Brachytherapy Uncertainties

  JOURNAL NAME: International Journal of Medical Physics, Clinical Engineering and Radiation Oncology, Vol.6 No.2, May 23, 2017

  ABSTRACT: Aim: To analyze the inter-fraction, intra-fraction uncertainties and to verify the delivered total dose with planned dose in the combined intracavitary-interstitial brachytherapy of gynaecological cancer patients using microMOSFET in-vivo dosimeter. Materials and Methods: Between May 2014 and March 2016, 22 patients who underwent brachytherapy treatments with an applicator combination of CT/MR compatible tandem, ring and Syed-Neblett template-guided rigid needles were included in this study. Specially designed microMOSFET, after calibration, was used to analyze the variations in dosimetry of combined intracavitary-interstitial application. Results: The standard deviation for Inter-fraction variation among 22 combined intracavitary interstitial applications ranged between 0.86% and 10.92%. When compared with the first fraction dose, the minimum and maximum dose variations were −9.5% and 26.36%, respectively. However, the mean doses varied between −5.95% and 14.49%. Intra-fraction variation, which is the difference of TPS calculated dose with first fraction microMOSFET-measured dose ranges from −6.77% to 8.68%. The variations in the delivered total mean dose in 66 sessions with planned doses were −3.09% to 10.83%. Conclusions: It is found that there was a gradual increase in microMOSFET measured doses as compared to the first fraction with that of subsequent fractions in 19 out of 22 applications. Tumor deformation and edema may be the influencing factors, but the applicator movements played a major role for the variations. We find that the microMOSFET is an easy and reliable system for independent verification of uncertainties during ICBT-ISBT treatments.