A 3D-printed anatomical pancreas and kidney phantom for optimizing SPECT/CT reconstruction settings in beta cell imaging using 111In-exendin

Weg, Wietske Woliner-van der; Deden, Laura N.; Meeuwis, Antoi P.W.; Koenrades, Maaike A.; Peeters, Louis; Kuipers, Henny; Laanstra, Geert J.; Gotthardt, Martin; Slump, Cornelis H.; Visser, Eric P.

doi:10.1186/s40658-016-0165-0

Cited by 20 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 11 publications

(16 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…5, aiming to be filled with a solution, such as radiotracer or "bone" material K 2 HPO 4 . 17,18,34,72 A completely different approach was used by Negus et al 41 who operated an FDM 3D printer to build transaxial slabs, and operated a standard Hewlett-Packard Officejet Pro 8100 printer to print radioactive paper sheets. 41 To do that, the radioisotope was inserted in the ink cartridge of the printer.…”

Section: B6 Geometricalmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Recent advances on the development of phantoms using 3D printing for imaging with CT, MRI, PET, SPECT, and ultrasound

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Printing technology, capable of producing three-dimensional (3D) objects, has evolved in recent years and provides potential for developing reproducible and sophisticated physical phantoms. 3D printing technology can help rapidly develop relatively low cost phantoms with appropriate complexities, which are useful in imaging or dosimetry measurements. The need for more realistic phantoms is emerging since imaging systems are now capable of acquiring multimodal and multiparametric data. This review addresses three main questions about the 3D printers currently in use, and their produced materials. The first question investigates whether the resolution of 3D printers is sufficient for existing imaging technologies. The second question explores if the materials of 3D-printed phantoms can produce realistic images representing various tissues and organs as taken by different imaging modalities such as computer tomography (CT), positron emission tomography (PET), single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), ultrasound (US), and mammography. The emergence of multimodal imaging increases the need for phantoms that can be scanned using different imaging modalities. The third question probes the feasibility and easiness of "printing" radioactive or nonradioactive solutions during the printing process. Methods: A systematic review of medical imaging studies published after January 2013 is performed using strict inclusion criteria. The databases used were Scopus and Web of Knowledge with specific search terms. In total, 139 papers were identified; however, only 50 were classified as relevant for this paper. In this review, following an appropriate introduction and literature research strategy, all 50 articles are presented in detail. A summary of tables and example figures of the most recent advances in 3D printing for the purposes of phantoms across different imaging modalities are provided. Results: All 50 studies printed and scanned phantoms in either CT, PET, SPECT, mammography, MRI, and US-or a combination of those modalities. According to the literature, different parameters were evaluated depending on the imaging modality used. Almost all papers evaluated more than two parameters, with the most common being Hounsfield units, density, attenuation and speed of sound. Conclusions: The development of this field is rapidly evolving and becoming more refined. There is potential to reach the ultimate goal of using 3D phantoms to get feedback on imaging scanners and reconstruction algorithms more regularly. Although the development of imaging phantoms is evident, there are still some limitations to address: One of which is printing accuracy, due to the printer properties. Another limitation is the materials available to print: There are not enough materials to mimic all the tissue properties. For example, one material can mimic one property-such as the density of real tissue-but not any other property, like speed of sound or attenuation.

show abstract

Section: B6 Geometricalmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, this new field has great potential to achieve more versatile phantoms. 10,[16][17][18][19][20][21]24,32,42,52,59,69,72,75,76,80…”

Section: B Characterization Of Phantom Imaging Valuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recent advances on the development of phantoms using 3D printing for imaging with CT, MRI, PET, SPECT, and ultrasound

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Of 21 full-text articles that were selected, two were excluded with one being review article and another one technical report. Of 19 eligible studies, 4 were further excluded because of duplicate publication in 2 studies by the same research group (20,21), while another 2 studies focused on 3D printed renal compartments for nuclear medicine imaging without reporting any clinical application of 3D printed models in renal anatomy or renal disease (22,23). Thus, a total of 15 articles were finally included in this review (15)(16)(17)(18)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34).…”

Section: Literature Search Outcomementioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of clinical value of three-dimensional printing in renal disease

Sun

Liu

2018

Quant. Imaging Med. Surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this systematic review is to analyse current literature related to the clinical value of three-dimensional (3D) printed models in renal disease. A literature search of PubMed and Scopus databases was performed to identify studies reporting the clinical application and usefulness of 3D printed models in renal disease. Fifteen studies were found to meet the selection criteria and were included in the analysis. Eight of them provided quantitative assessments with five studies focusing on dimensional accuracy of 3D printed models in replicating renal anatomy and tumour, and on measuring tumour volume between 3D printed models and original source images and surgical specimens, with mean difference less than 10%. The other three studies reported that the use of 3D printed models significantly enhanced medical students and specialists' ability to identify anatomical structures when compared to two-dimensional (2D) images alone; and significantly shortened intraoperative ultrasound duration compared to without use of 3D printed models. Seven studies provided qualitative assessments of the usefulness of 3D printed kidney models with findings showing that 3D printed models improved patient's understanding of renal anatomy and pathology; improved medical trainees' understanding of renal malignant tumours when compared to viewing medical images alone; and assisted surgical planning and simulation of renal surgical procedures with significant reductions of intraoperative complications. The cost and time associated with 3D printed kidney model production was reported in 10 studies, with costs ranging from USD$100 to USD$1,000, and duration of 3D printing production up to 31 h. The entire process of 3D printing could take up to a few days. This review shows that 3D printed kidney models are accurate in delineating renal anatomical structures and renal tumours with high accuracy. Patient-specific 3D printed models serve as a useful tool in preoperative planning and simulation of surgical procedures for treatment of renal tumours. Further studies with inclusion of more cases and with a focus on reducing the cost and 3D model production time deserve to be investigated.

show abstract

“…There has been at least one proofof-concept work [2] but most researchers aimed at patient-specific dosimetry both for radiotherapy [3] and nuclear medicine applications [4,5]. However, there were also cases where the phantoms were constructed with quality assurance in mind [6,7]. There was one case of 3D modeling as an aid in preparation for prostate cancer surgery [8] and one case where it was aimed to produce a 3D printed phantom, which would be functionally equivalent to commercial phantoms [9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Depending on the printing pattern used and the total size, published duration varied from several minutes [10] up to 12 days [7] when the FDM technology was used. Therefore, despite restrictions on available materials and the lack of sufficient variation in the infill patterns, expensive photo-curing printers are more often used [2][3][4]6] because they are normally much faster than the FDM variety.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of 11 Available Materials With Custom Three-Dimensional-Printing Patterns for the Simulation of Muscle, Fat, and Lung Hounsfield Units in Patient-Specific Phantoms

Okkalidis

Chatzigeorgiou

Okkalides

2017

Journal of Engineering and Science in Medical Diagnostics and Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A couple of fused deposition modeling (FDM) three-dimensional (3D) printers using variable infill density patterns were employed to simulate human muscle, fat, and lung tissue as it is represented by Hounsfield units (HUs) in computer tomography (CT) scans. Eleven different commercial plastic filaments were assessed by measuring their mean HU on CT images of small cubes printed with different patterns. The HU values were proportional to the mean effective density of the cubes. Polylactic acid (PLA) filaments were chosen. They had good printing characteristics and acceptable HU. Such filaments obtained from two different vendors were then tested by printing two sets of cubes comprising 10 and 6 cubes with 100% to 20% and 100% to 50% infill densities, respectively. They were printed with different printing patterns named “Regular” and “Bricks,” respectively. It was found that the HU values measured on the CT images of the 3D-printed cubes were proportional to the infill density with slight differences between vendors and printers. The Regular pattern with infill densities of about 30%, 90%, and 100% were found to produce HUs equivalent to lung, fat, and muscle. This was confirmed with histograms of the respective region of interest (ROI). The assessment of popular 3D-printing materials resulted in the choice of PLA, which together with the proposed technique was found suitable for the adequate simulation of the muscle, fat, and lung HU in printed patient-specific phantoms.

show abstract

A 3D-printed anatomical pancreas and kidney phantom for optimizing SPECT/CT reconstruction settings in beta cell imaging using 111In-exendin

Cited by 20 publications

References 11 publications

Recent advances on the development of phantoms using 3D printing for imaging with CT, MRI, PET, SPECT, and ultrasound

Recent advances on the development of phantoms using 3D printing for imaging with CT, MRI, PET, SPECT, and ultrasound

A systematic review of clinical value of three-dimensional printing in renal disease

Assessment of 11 Available Materials With Custom Three-Dimensional-Printing Patterns for the Simulation of Muscle, Fat, and Lung Hounsfield Units in Patient-Specific Phantoms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About