Additive manufacture of custom radiation dosimetry phantoms: An automated method compatible with commercial polymer 3D printers

Leary, Martin; Kron, Tomas; Keller, Cameron; Franich, Rick; Lonski, Peta; Subic, Aleksandar; Brandt, Milan

doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2015.07.052

Cited by 47 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is significant in terms of the development of medical applications for specific patients. 3D printing can be achieved either directly (where the phantom is printed) or indirectly (where the casting mold is printed and other materials are used to build the phantom) …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3D printing can be achieved either directly (where the phantom is printed) or indirectly (where the casting mold is printed and other materials are used to build the phantom). 11,[13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] This article investigates the quality of the image produced when a 3D-printed phantom is scanned by one or more of the imaging modalities introduced earlier. Image quality can be assessed either quantitatively or qualitatively.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

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: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

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

“…However, in order to create a truly anthropomorphic device, it is necessary to select materials which mimic the imaging properties, such as X-ray opacity, of native tissues. However, there is not a thorough repository of radiation property data for 3D printing materials [23]. Furthermore, since various imaging techniques utilize different imaging energy levels, the materials must have the proper radiopacity at multiple incident energy levels.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, the anthropomorphic nasocranial phantom could be used as a teaching aid for a CT technician to visualize the complex nasal structure due to its fidelity relative to the original patient data. Leary et al noted the ability of high-accuracy phantoms to serve as better teaching models, thereby improving treatment outcomes [23]. Additionally, the tunability of the radiopacity makes it possible to use these ABS-bismuth filaments for 3D printing implantable materials, such as pins, plates, or screws, which would be straightforward to visualize during CT imaging.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Leary et al provide a thorough review of the requirements and challenges of 3D printing radiation dosimetry phantoms, including a discussion of the radiation interaction properties of commercially available 3D printing materials [23]. Since many common additive manufacturing filaments, particularly polymers, provide little radiation attenuation due to their low radiodensity, custom bismuth-infused acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) filaments were generated, allowing for a tunable radiopacity level that scaled with the concentration of the incorporated metal.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Bismuth Infusion of ABS Enables Additive Manufacturing of Complex Radiological Phantoms and Shielding Equipment

Ceh

Youd

Mastrovich

et al. 2017

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Radiopacity is a critical property of materials that are used for a range of radiological applications, including the development of phantom devices that emulate the radiodensity of native tissues and the production of protective equipment for personnel handling radioactive materials. Three-dimensional (3D) printing is a fabrication platform that is well suited to creating complex anatomical replicas or custom labware to accomplish these radiological purposes. We created and tested multiple ABS (Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene) filaments infused with varied concentrations of bismuth (1.2–2.7 g/cm3), a radiopaque metal that is compatible with plastic infusion, to address the poor gamma radiation attenuation of many mainstream 3D printing materials. X-ray computed tomography (CT) experiments of these filaments indicated that a density of 1.2 g/cm3 of bismuth-infused ABS emulates bone radiopacity during X-ray CT imaging on preclinical and clinical scanners. ABS-bismuth filaments along with ABS were 3D printed to create an embedded human nasocranial anatomical phantom that mimicked radiological properties of native bone and soft tissue. Increasing the bismuth content in the filaments to 2.7 g/cm3 created a stable material that could attenuate 50% of 99mTechnetium gamma emission when printed with a 2.0 mm wall thickness. A shielded test tube rack was printed to attenuate source radiation as a protective measure for lab personnel. We demonstrated the utility of novel filaments to serve multiple radiological purposes, including the creation of anthropomorphic phantoms and safety labware, by tuning the level of radiation attenuation through material customization.

show abstract

Material matters: Analysis of density uncertainty in 3D printing and its consequences for radiation oncology

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Additive manufacture of custom radiation dosimetry phantoms: An automated method compatible with commercial polymer 3D printers

Cited by 47 publications

References 51 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

Bismuth Infusion of ABS Enables Additive Manufacturing of Complex Radiological Phantoms and Shielding Equipment

Material matters: Analysis of density uncertainty in 3D printing and its consequences for radiation oncology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About