| Literature DB >> 35494185 |
Grzegorz Bielęda1,2, Adam Chicheł3, Marek Boehlke4, Grzegorz Zwierzchowski1,2, Artur Chyrek3, Wojciech Burchardt1,3, Patrycja Stefaniak2, Natalia Wiśniewska2, Kinga Czereba3, Julian Malicki1,2.
Abstract
Purpose: One of the main challenges in facial region brachytherapy is fixation of vendor-delivered standard applicators. Reproducibility can be maintained; however, there are frequent problems with applicator fitting to the skin surface in pleated regions. Manually prepared individual moulds require technological facilities and highly-trained staff. This article presents 3D-printed applicator preparation for a particular patient skin brachytherapy, using low-cost equipment and free software. We described applicator preparation in a step-by-step workflow. Material and methods: This study demonstrated preparation of a skin brachytherapy applicator for a challenging recurrent tumor located in the nose bridge. During first visit of patient, fiducial markers were placed to enclose treated region. Patient was computed tomography (CT)-scanned, and reconstruction of target volume and surrounding organs at risk (OARs) were performed using treatment planning system (TPS). In TPS on patient's surface, a 1-cm thick bolus was added as a body of applicator. Inside the bolus, source paths were designed, and pre-plan was prepared. Using Beben - DICOM to standard triangle language (STL) software, the body of applicator and source-paths from pre-planning was transformed into an STL file, which was used as a solid definition in 3D printing.Entities:
Keywords: 3D printing; individual applicator; skin brachytherapy
Year: 2022 PMID: 35494185 PMCID: PMC9044311 DOI: 10.5114/jcb.2022.114353
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Contemp Brachytherapy ISSN: 2081-2841
Fig. 1Patient’s clinical status at presentation (A), five weeks (B), and ten months after the treatment (C)
Fig. 2A) Fiducial markers placed on the skin surface of the patient. Markers enclose the treated lesion with a 5 mm margin. B) Fiducial markers on transversal CT images. C) Fiducial markers on sagittal CT reconstruction. D) Fiducial markers visualized in 3D volume CT reconstruction
Fig. 3A) A CT scan with visible gap between reconstructed structures (external: orange, applicator: pink) in soft tissue HU (Hounsfield unit) window. B) The same structures are visualized in the lung HU window (center: –60 HU, width: 1,600 HU). The adjacency is much better, and there are no air gaps visible between structures and the patient body
Fig. 4CT scans and the applicator visualization (green) on transversal (A), sagittal (B), and coronal (C) sections. Recesses for eye shielding are visible on the coronal section. D) 3D reconstruction of the designed applicator body
Fig. 5The reconstruction of applicator body (green) with planned catheter paths (light blue). There is a visible 3D reconstruction of target volume (pink). Catheters extend outside the body of applicator
Fig. 6A visualization of pre-planned dose distribution on CT scans. Red dots represent active dwell positions, and isodoses are described in the images
Instruction and check list to transform DICOM structure and plan files into a model for 3D printing, using Beben – DICOM to STL software
Fig. 7A photography of 3D-printed applicator. The catheters’ tip ends are located on the patient’s nose
Fig. 8The applicator placed on the patient’s face secured with regular surgical tape
Fig. 9CT scans of the patient with a placed applicator with dose distribution of accepted treatment plan. A) Transversal section with visible small air gaps in soft tissue HU window. B) Good target volume coverage with 100% isodose (red line) visible in the sagittal section. C) Transversal section in the lung HU window. In this visualization, the applicator fits very well and air gaps are much smaller. D) Dose distribution of calculated treatment planned presented in the sagittal section in the lung HU window
Dose distribution parameters for reconstructed structures calculated for pre-plan and realized treatment plan
| Pre-plan (%) | Plan (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| CTV | 0.31 cm3 | 0.34 cm3 | |
| V100 | 98.17 | 95.67 | |
| V150 | 1.15 | 1.83 | |
| V95 | 99.62 | 98.48 | |
| D90 | 106.69 | 104.22 | |
| D100 | 91.14 | 84.13 | |
| Bones | |||
| D2 | 25.53 | 15.48 | |
| D0.1 | 63.47 | 52.88 | |
| Eye left | |||
| D2 | 9.38 (4.69)* | 6.37 (3.19)* | |
| D0.1 | 14.75 (7.38)* | 11.28 (5.64)* | |
| Eye right | |||
| D2 | 11.81 (5.91)* | 7.67 (3.84)* | |
| D0.1 | 18.82 (9.41)* | 13.50 (6.75)* | |
| Lens left | |||
| D0.1 | 8.47 (4.24)* | 6.94 (3.47)* | |
| Lens right | |||
| D0.1 | 11.27 (5.64)* | 7.76 (3.88)* | |
| Optic nerve left | |||
| D0.1 | 5.80 | 4.69 | |
| Optic nerve right | |||
| D0.1 | 6.62 | 4.99 | |
V100 – volume receiving at least 100% of prescribed dose, V150 – volume receiving at least 150% of prescribed dose, V95 – volume receiving at least 95% of prescribed dose, D90 – lowest dose received by 90% of delineated volume, D100 – lowest dose received by 100% of delineated volume, D2 – highest dose received by 2 cm3 of delineated volume, D0.1 – highest dose received by 0.1 cm3 of delineated volume
Values in parentheses refer to presumed doses for the eyes and lenses with the use of lead shielding reducing the dose by half