Dataset Information

A review of 3D printed patient specific immobilisation devices in radiotherapy.

ABSTRACT:

Background and purpose

Radiotherapy is one of the most effective cancer treatment techniques, however, delivering the optimal radiation dosage is challenging due to movements of the patient during treatment. Immobilisation devices are typically used to minimise motion. This paper reviews published research investigating the use of 3D printing (additive manufacturing) to produce patient-specific immobilisation devices, and compares these to traditional devices.

Materials and methods

A systematic review was conducted across thirty-eight databases, with results limited to those published between January 2000 and January 2019. A total of eighteen papers suitably detailed the use of 3D printing to manufacture and test immobilisers, and were included in this review. This included ten journal papers, five posters, two conference papers and one thesis.

Results

61% of relevant studies featured human subjects, 22% focussed on animal subjects, 11% used phantoms, and one study utilised experimental test methods. Advantages of 3D printed immobilisers reported in literature included improved patient experience and comfort over traditional methods, as well as high levels of accuracy between immobiliser and patient, repeatable setup, and similar beam attenuation properties to thermoformed immobilisers. Disadvantages included the slow 3D printing process and the potential for inaccuracies in the digitisation of patient geometry.

Conclusion

It was found that a lack of technical knowledge, combined with disparate studies with small patient samples, required further research in order to validate claims supporting the benefits of 3D printing to improve patient comfort or treatment accuracy.

SUBMITTER: Asfia A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7807671 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A review of 3D printed patient specific immobilisation devices in radiotherapy.

Asfia Amirhossein A Novak James I JI Mohammed Mazher Iqbal MI Rolfe Bernard B Kron Tomas T

Physics and imaging in radiation oncology 20200101

<h4>Background and purpose</h4>Radiotherapy is one of the most effective cancer treatment techniques, however, delivering the optimal radiation dosage is challenging due to movements of the patient during treatment. Immobilisation devices are typically used to minimise motion. This paper reviews published research investigating the use of 3D printing (additive manufacturing) to produce patient-specific immobilisation devices, and compares these to traditional devices.<h4>Materials and methods</h ...[more]

PMID: 33458304

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRadiotherapy for head and neck cancer may cause various oral sequelae, such as radiation-induced mucositis. To protect healthy tissue from irradiation, intraoral devices can be used. Current tissue retraction devices (TRDs) have to be either individually manufactured at considerable cost and time expenditure or they are limited in their variability. In this context, a 3D-printed, tooth-borne TRD might further facilitate clinical use.MethodsA novel approach for the manufacturing of TRDs is described and its clinical application is analysed retrospectively. The devices were virtually designed for fabrication by 3D-printing technology, enabling-in only a single printing design-caudal or bi-lateral tongue displacement, as well as stabilization of a tongue-out position. For a total of 10 patients undergoing radiotherapy of head and neck tumors, the devices were individually adapted after pre-fabrication. Technical and clinical feasibility was assessed along with patient adherence. Tissue spacing was calculated by volumetric analysis of tongue retraction. In one exemplary case, radiotherapy treatment plans before and after tissue displacement were generated and compared. The reproducibility of maxillomandibular relation at device re-positioning was quantified by repeated intraoral optical scanning in a voluntary participant.Results3D-printing was useful for the simplification of TRD manufacture, resulting in a total patient treatment time of less than 30 min. The devices were tolerated well by all tested patients over the entire radiation treatment period. No technical complications occurred with the devices. The TRDs caused an effective spacing of the healthy adjacent tissue, e.g., the tongue. Position changes of maxillomandibular relation were limited to a mean value of 98.1 µm ± 29.4 µm root mean square deviation between initial reference and follow-up positions.ConclusionsThe presented method allows a resource-efficient fabrication of individualized, tooth-bourne TRDs. A high reproducibility of maxillomandibular relation was found and the first clinical experiences underline the high potential of such devices for radiotherapy in the head and neck area.

Project description:BackgroundThe responsible use of 3D-printing in medicine includes a context-based quality assurance. Considerable literature has been published in this field, yet the quality of assessment varies widely. The limited discriminatory power of some assessment methods challenges the comparison of results. The total error for patient specific anatomical models comprises relevant partial errors of the production process: segmentation error (SegE), digital editing error (DEE), printing error (PrE). The present review provides an overview to improve the general understanding of the process specific errors, quantitative analysis, and standardized terminology.MethodsThis review focuses on literature on quality assurance of patient-specific anatomical models in terms of geometric accuracy published before December 4th, 2022 (n = 139). In an attempt to organize the literature, the publications are assigned to comparable categories and the absolute values of the maximum mean deviation (AMMD) per publication are determined therein.ResultsThe three major examined types of original structures are teeth or jaw (n = 52), skull bones without jaw (n = 17) and heart with coronary arteries (n = 16). VPP (vat photopolymerization) is the most frequently employed basic 3D-printing technology (n = 112 experiments). The median values of AMMD (AMMD: The metric AMMD is defined as the largest linear deviation, based on an average value from at least two individual measurements.) are 0.8 mm for the SegE, 0.26 mm for the PrE and 0.825 mm for the total error. No average values are found for the DEE.ConclusionThe total error is not significantly higher than the partial errors which may compensate each other. Consequently SegE, DEE and PrE should be analyzed individually to describe the result quality as their sum according to rules of error propagation. Current methods for quality assurance of the segmentation are often either realistic and accurate or resource efficient. Future research should focus on implementing models for cost effective evaluations with high accuracy and realism. Our system of categorization may be enhancing the understanding of the overall process and a valuable contribution to the structural design and reporting of future experiments. It can be used to educate specialists for risk assessment and process validation within the additive manufacturing industry.

Dataset Information

A review of 3D printed patient specific immobilisation devices in radiotherapy.

Background and purpose

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

A review of 3D printed patient specific immobilisation devices in radiotherapy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets