Cargando…
Not all 3D‐printed bolus is created equal: Variation between 3D‐printed polylactic acid (PLA) bolus samples sourced from external manufacturers
INTRODUCTION: Polylactic acid (PLA) is a promising material for customised bolus 3D‐printing in radiotherapy, however variations in printing techniques between external manufacturers could increase treatment uncertainties. This study aimed to assess consistency across various 3D‐printed PLA samples...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9442296/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35506369 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.591 |
_version_ | 1784782781791862784 |
---|---|
author | Brown, Kerryn Kupfer, Tom Harris, Benjamin Penso, Sam Khor, Richard Moseshvili, Eka |
author_facet | Brown, Kerryn Kupfer, Tom Harris, Benjamin Penso, Sam Khor, Richard Moseshvili, Eka |
author_sort | Brown, Kerryn |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Polylactic acid (PLA) is a promising material for customised bolus 3D‐printing in radiotherapy, however variations in printing techniques between external manufacturers could increase treatment uncertainties. This study aimed to assess consistency across various 3D‐printed PLA samples from different manufacturers. METHODS: Sample prints of dimensions 5 × 5 × 1 cm with 100% infill were acquired from multiple commercial 3D‐printing services. All samples were CT scanned to determine average Hounsfield unit (HU) values and physical densities. The coefficient of equivalent thickness (CET) was obtained for both photons and electrons and dose attenuation compared to TPS calculations in Elekta Monaco v5.11. RESULTS: Some samples showed warped edges up to 1.5 mm and extensive internal radiological defects only detectable with CT scanning. Physical densities ranged from 1.06 to 1.22 g cm(−3) and HU values ranged from −5.1 to 221.0 HU. Measured CET values varied from 0.95 to 1.17 and TPS dose calculations were consistent with the variation in CET. Electron R50 and R90 shifted by up to 2 mm for every 1 cm of printed bolus, a clinically significant finding. Photon surface dose varied by up to 3%, while depth doses were within 1%. CONCLUSIONS: 3D‐printed PLA can have considerable variability in density, HU and CET values between samples and manufacturers. Centres looking to outsource 3D‐printed bolus would benefit from clear, open communication with manufacturers and undertake stringent QA examination prior to implementation into the clinical environment. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9442296 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-94422962022-09-09 Not all 3D‐printed bolus is created equal: Variation between 3D‐printed polylactic acid (PLA) bolus samples sourced from external manufacturers Brown, Kerryn Kupfer, Tom Harris, Benjamin Penso, Sam Khor, Richard Moseshvili, Eka J Med Radiat Sci Original Articles INTRODUCTION: Polylactic acid (PLA) is a promising material for customised bolus 3D‐printing in radiotherapy, however variations in printing techniques between external manufacturers could increase treatment uncertainties. This study aimed to assess consistency across various 3D‐printed PLA samples from different manufacturers. METHODS: Sample prints of dimensions 5 × 5 × 1 cm with 100% infill were acquired from multiple commercial 3D‐printing services. All samples were CT scanned to determine average Hounsfield unit (HU) values and physical densities. The coefficient of equivalent thickness (CET) was obtained for both photons and electrons and dose attenuation compared to TPS calculations in Elekta Monaco v5.11. RESULTS: Some samples showed warped edges up to 1.5 mm and extensive internal radiological defects only detectable with CT scanning. Physical densities ranged from 1.06 to 1.22 g cm(−3) and HU values ranged from −5.1 to 221.0 HU. Measured CET values varied from 0.95 to 1.17 and TPS dose calculations were consistent with the variation in CET. Electron R50 and R90 shifted by up to 2 mm for every 1 cm of printed bolus, a clinically significant finding. Photon surface dose varied by up to 3%, while depth doses were within 1%. CONCLUSIONS: 3D‐printed PLA can have considerable variability in density, HU and CET values between samples and manufacturers. Centres looking to outsource 3D‐printed bolus would benefit from clear, open communication with manufacturers and undertake stringent QA examination prior to implementation into the clinical environment. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-05-04 2022-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9442296/ /pubmed/35506369 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.591 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Australian Society of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy and New Zealand Institute of Medical Radiation Technology https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Brown, Kerryn Kupfer, Tom Harris, Benjamin Penso, Sam Khor, Richard Moseshvili, Eka Not all 3D‐printed bolus is created equal: Variation between 3D‐printed polylactic acid (PLA) bolus samples sourced from external manufacturers |
title | Not all 3D‐printed bolus is created equal: Variation between 3D‐printed polylactic acid (PLA) bolus samples sourced from external manufacturers |
title_full | Not all 3D‐printed bolus is created equal: Variation between 3D‐printed polylactic acid (PLA) bolus samples sourced from external manufacturers |
title_fullStr | Not all 3D‐printed bolus is created equal: Variation between 3D‐printed polylactic acid (PLA) bolus samples sourced from external manufacturers |
title_full_unstemmed | Not all 3D‐printed bolus is created equal: Variation between 3D‐printed polylactic acid (PLA) bolus samples sourced from external manufacturers |
title_short | Not all 3D‐printed bolus is created equal: Variation between 3D‐printed polylactic acid (PLA) bolus samples sourced from external manufacturers |
title_sort | not all 3d‐printed bolus is created equal: variation between 3d‐printed polylactic acid (pla) bolus samples sourced from external manufacturers |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9442296/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35506369 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.591 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT brownkerryn notall3dprintedbolusiscreatedequalvariationbetween3dprintedpolylacticacidplabolussamplessourcedfromexternalmanufacturers AT kupfertom notall3dprintedbolusiscreatedequalvariationbetween3dprintedpolylacticacidplabolussamplessourcedfromexternalmanufacturers AT harrisbenjamin notall3dprintedbolusiscreatedequalvariationbetween3dprintedpolylacticacidplabolussamplessourcedfromexternalmanufacturers AT pensosam notall3dprintedbolusiscreatedequalvariationbetween3dprintedpolylacticacidplabolussamplessourcedfromexternalmanufacturers AT khorrichard notall3dprintedbolusiscreatedequalvariationbetween3dprintedpolylacticacidplabolussamplessourcedfromexternalmanufacturers AT moseshvilieka notall3dprintedbolusiscreatedequalvariationbetween3dprintedpolylacticacidplabolussamplessourcedfromexternalmanufacturers |