Premium
Sci‐Thur PM – Brachytherapy 06: 3D Printed Surface Applicators for High Dose Rate Brachytherapy
Author(s) -
Clarke Scott,
Yewondwossen Mammo,
Robar James
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.473
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 2473-4209
pISSN - 0094-2405
DOI - 10.1118/1.4961774
Subject(s) - 3d printed , brachytherapy , 3d printer , imaging phantom , biomedical engineering , dosimetry , medicine , nuclear medicine , 3d printing , medical physics , materials science , radiation therapy , surgery , engineering , mechanical engineering , composite material
Purpose: The purpose of this work is to develop a new applicator for administering high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy using 3D printing technology. Primary advantages of using a 3D printed applicator will be to offer a more streamlined approach for therapists and patients while achieving better conformity, reproducibility, and patient specific applicators. Methods: A phantom study was conducted to measure the effectiveness of a 3D printed surface applicator by analyzing tumours on three locations of the body: the foot, nose, and scalp. The applicator was designed using Eclipse and further modified using Blender to create the catheter tunnels before being printed on a Lulzbot Taz 5 3D printer. A radiation plan was made using Oncentra Brachytherapy for a control treatment option using Freiburg Flaps and one with the novel method of a 3D printed applicator. A comparative analysis was made using D90, D100, V100, V150, and V200 Results: The 3D printed applicator showed comparable dose coverage with significant improvements on highly irregular surfaces when analyzed against a plan made using Freiburg Flaps. Although both plans exhibited complete tumour coverage, the 3D applicator showed improvements in D90 and V150 and the 3D applicator had a dose homogeneity index (DHI) of 0.99 compared to a DHI of 0.97 for the control. Therapist prep time also dropped significantly due to the lack of need for a thermoplastic mesh. Conclusions: 3D printed applicators for treatment of superficial sites proved to offer more patient convenience, less prep time, better conformity and tighter margins.