The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is in the process of rescinding or revising guidance and policies posted on this webpage in accordance with Executive Order 14151 Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing, and Executive Order 14168 Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government. In the interim, any previously issued diversity, equity, inclusion, or gender-related guidance on this webpage should be considered rescinded that is inconsistent with these Executive Orders.

Event Notification Report for January 18, 2017

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Operations Center

Event Reports For
01/17/2017 - 01/18/2017

** EVENT NUMBERS **


52470

To top of page
Agreement State Event Number: 52470
Rep Org: WA OFFICE OF RADIATION PROTECTION
Licensee: SEATTLE CANCER CARE ALLIANCE
Region: 4
City: SEATTLE State: WA
County:
License #: M0225
Agreement: Y
Docket:
NRC Notified By: ANDREW HALLORAN
HQ OPS Officer: DONALD NORWOOD
Notification Date: 12/30/2016
Notification Time: 18:48 [ET]
Event Date: 12/23/2016
Event Time: [PST]
Last Update Date: 01/17/2017
Emergency Class: NON EMERGENCY
10 CFR Section:
AGREEMENT STATE
Person (Organization):
JAMES DRAKE (R4DO)
NMSS_EVENTS_NOTIFIC (EMAI)

Event Text

AGREEMENT STATE REPORT - MISADMINISTRATION DURING HIGH DOSE RATE PROCEDURE

The following information was received via facsimile:

"At approximately 1355 PST on Friday, 12/30/2016, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance called the Washington State Radioactive Materials Section to report a medical event. The event had occurred on Friday, 12/23/2016 but the date that the event was discovered was not provided. The summary of the event is as follows: An Ir-192 source was incorrectly positioned during an HDR procedure, resulting in a reduced dose to the treatment volume and an unintended dose to the surrounding healthy tissue. Limited information was provided by the licensee because they are still investigating the misadministration, but additional information will be provided in a follow-up conversation on Tuesday, 1/3/2017."

Washington Incident Number: WA-16-049


* * * UPDATE ON 01/17/2017 AT 1714 EST FROM ANDREW HALLORAN TO STEVEN VITTO * * *

The following was received via email from the State of Washington:

"Patient was referred to SCCA [Seattle Cancer Care Alliance] for high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy for treatment to a cervical lesion extending primarily on the left lateral side with upper to mid-vaginal involvement. Procedures were initially being developed to treat the patient with an interstitial Syed applicator. However, due to a medical condition that arose, the patient was no longer a candidate for this procedure. Therefore, the plan was to treat the patient with intracavitary brachytherapy, consisting of two fractions (1 & 2) with a tandem and ovoid (T&O) applicator set (because of a more favorable paracervical dose distribution provided by the T&O applicator configuration), and an additional two fractions (3 & 4) using the Miami cylinder applicator with tandem (to enable dose delivery to the vaginal target using the cylinder configuration).

"The first two tandem and ovoid (T&O) HDR treatments (fx 1 & 2) were delivered as intended on 12/19/16 and 12/21/16. During the first fraction of the Tandem/Miami cylinder applicator (fx 3) delivered on 12/23/16, an incorrect tandem applicator length (119.8 cm) was entered into the treatment planning system instead of the 131.9 cm distance for the Miami tandem. This error was not caught prior to treatment delivery and the treatment dose in the tandem was offset by 12 cm inferiorly. The error was discovered prior to the 4th fraction being delivered on 12/29/16. The patient was notified of the error and the treatment was corrected and postponed to 12/30/16.

"The intended dose to the cervical tumor volume for the 3rd fraction was 660 cGy, and the actual dose delivered for the fraction was 65 cGy to 90 percent of the target volume."

Notified R4DO (Werner) and NMSS Events Notification via email.


A Medical Event may indicate potential problems in a medical facility's use of radioactive materials. It does not necessarily result in harm to the patient.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, March 25, 2021