[Physical and technical quality assurance and radiation protection in transperineal interstitial permanent prostate brachytherapy with 125-iodine seeds].

Background: Early stage prostate cancer can be treated successfully by interstitial brachytherapy with 125-iodine seeds. A quality-assurance programme is presented that was designed for this purpose for internal clinical use. Furthermore the requirements of the new German Ordinance Governing Radiation Protection (StrlSchV) that came into force on August 1, 2001, are taken into account.

Material And Methods: For the 125-iodine monotherapy of the prostate we used RAPID STRANDS (Amersham Health, Braunschweig, Germany). According to the guidelines of the new Ordinance Governing Radiation Protection, the determination of the body dose of the staff is made to rely on the new measurement quantities H(p) (10) and H(p) (0.07). The nominal air kerma rate of the seeds is measured with a calibrated well-chamber of the type HDR 1000 Plus and an electrometer of the type MAX 4000 (Standard Imaging Inc., USA). The ultrasound images of the prostate are produced by an ultrasound device of the type Falcon 2101 (B-K Medical, Denmark). For treatment planning the programme VariSeed (Varian, Darmstadt, Germany) was employed. Correct loading of the needles is controlled by autoradiography before implantation. After the implantation radiation-protection measurements in the operating room are carried out.

Results: As regards the personnel, for the depth personal dose equivalent Hp(10) and relating to two applications each, measurement values between 0 microSv and 14 microSv resulted. The control of the radiation exposure of the hands revealed superficial personal dose values H(p) (0.07) of up to 1 mSv. The nominal air kerma rates of the RAPID STRANDS were all lying within the 95% confidence interval guaranteed by the producer. The autoradiographs documented -- except for one case -- the correct loading of the needles. The interstitial transperineal prostate implantation of the 125-iodine seeds succeeded as planned with all patients. Until now no contamination of the operating room was detected by the radiation-protection measurements.

Conclusion: The physical-technical quality assurance programme presented here covers the whole physical-technical range of the internal clinical quality assurance and could be integrated into the course of the treatment without any problems. It has th following advantages: The autoradiographic documentation of the correctly loaded needles serves as proof that the prerequisite for the production of the prescribed physical dose distribution is fulfilled. The internal clinical determination of the nominal air kerma rate is the basis for a correct dose application.