Evaluation of deformable image registration between external beam radiotherapy and HDR brachytherapy for cervical cancer with a 3D-printed deformable pelvis phantom

Kadoya, Noriyuki; Miyasaka, Yoshinori; Nakajima, Yoshiyuki; Kuroda, Yoshihiro; Ito, Kengo; Chiba, Masanori; Sato, Kiyokazu; Dobashi, Suguru; Yamamoto, Takaya; Takahashi, Noriyoshi; Kubozono, Masaki; Takeda, Ken; Jingu, Keiichi

doi:10.1002/mp.12168

Cited by 42 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another study also printed organs that are included in the torso. Kadoya et al developed uterus and bladder phantoms with −35 HU and 90 HU, respectively. However, the phantoms had different HU compared to those of the patient, which were 70 HU for the uterus and 50 HU for the bladder.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The resolution is expressed in dots per inch (dpi) or micrometers (lm) and assessed by comparing the dimensions of the produced physical phantom with the original dimensions provided to the printer. Among the papers used, 10 have assessed the resolution or accuracy of the printer by quantitative (numerical) comparison, [26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35] 10 by qualitative (figural) comparison, 22,[36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44] and 14 by both quantitative and qualitative comparison. 10,21,[45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56] Sixteen of the research articles do not include a verification of the printers' resolutions.…”

Section: A Characterization Of 3d-printed Phantom Spatial Accuracymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…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 3 more Smart Citations

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: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A Characterization Of 3d-printed Phantom Spatial Accuracymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

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

“…15 Additionally, at small volumes, the bladder did not deform well as substantial amounts of air remained in the bladder. 21 The silicone medical balloons used in PETE to represent the bladder and rectum addressed these concerns, as the bladder performed well at low volumes with little presence of air and did not deteriorate rapidly with continued use. A benefit of this design method is that one can simulate dif- | 273 marked and in clinical use for the treatment of prostate cancer.…”

Section: E1 | Simulating Bladder and Rectal Status Changesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and evaluation of a novel MR‐compatible pelvic end‐to‐end phantom

Cunningham

Barberi²,

Miller³

et al. 2018

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

MR‐only treatment planning and MR‐IGRT leverage MRI's powerful soft tissue contrast for high‐precision radiation therapy. However, anthropomorphic MR‐compatible phantoms are currently limited. This work describes the development and evaluation of a custom‐designed, modular, pelvic end‐to‐end (PETE) MR‐compatible phantom to benchmark MR‐only and MR‐IGRT workflows. For construction considerations, subject data were assessed for phantom/skeletal geometry and internal organ kinematics to simulate average male pelvis anatomy. Various materials for the bone, bladder, and rectum were evaluated for utility within the phantom. Once constructed, PETE underwent CT‐SIM, MR‐Linac, and MR‐SIM imaging to qualitatively assess organ visibility. Scans were acquired with various bladder and rectal volumes to assess component interactions, filling capabilities, and filling reproducibility via volume and centroid differences. PETE simulates average male pelvis anatomy and comprises an acrylic body oval (height/width = 23.0/38.1 cm) and a cast‐mold urethane skeleton, with silicone balloons simulating bladder and rectum, a silicone sponge prostate, and hydrophilic poly(vinyl alcohol) foam to simulate fat/tissue separation between organs. Access ports enable retrofitting the phantom with other inserts including point/film‐based dosimetry options. Acceptable contrast was achievable in CT‐SIM and MR‐Linac images. However, the bladder was challenging to distinguish from background in CT‐SIM. The desired contrast for T1‐weighted and T2‐weighted MR‐SIM (dark and bright bladders, respectively) was achieved. Rectum and bone exhibited no MR signal. Inputted volumes differed by <5 and <10 mL from delineated rectum (CT‐SIM) and bladder (MR‐SIM) volumes. Increasing bladder and rectal volumes induced organ displacements and shape variations. Reproduced volumes differed by <4.5 mL, with centroid displacements <1.4 mm. A point dose measurement with an MR‐compatible ion chamber in an MR‐Linac was within 1.5% of expected. A novel, modular phantom was developed with suitable materials and properties that accurately and reproducibly simulate status changes with multiple dosimetry options. Future work includes integrating more realistic organ models to further expand phantom options.

show abstract

Medical Applications

2018

3D Industrial Printing With Polymers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluation of deformable image registration between external beam radiotherapy and HDR brachytherapy for cervical cancer with a 3D-printed deformable pelvis phantom

Cited by 42 publications

References 29 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

Development and evaluation of a novel MR‐compatible pelvic end‐to‐end phantom

Medical Applications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About