Application of 3D printing for personalized boluses in radiotherapy: a systematic review.

IF 1.2 Q4 ONCOLOGY
Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy Pub Date : 2025-03-21 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.5603/rpor.104014
Aleksandra Bochyńska, Anna Zawadzka, Paweł Kukołowicz, Mateusz Jacek Spałek
{"title":"Application of 3D printing for personalized boluses in radiotherapy: a systematic review.","authors":"Aleksandra Bochyńska, Anna Zawadzka, Paweł Kukołowicz, Mateusz Jacek Spałek","doi":"10.5603/rpor.104014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The goal of this study was to evaluate the current literature covering the topic of 3D-printed radiotherapy boluses in the context of fabrication methods, materials, and clinical outcomes. This systematic review followed the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Data were extracted for authors, publication details, application type, printing technique and materials, study type, radiation type, reported outcomes and implementation difficulties. The search yielded 161 articles, 52 of which met the inclusion criteria. Publications on 3D printing for customized boluses have increased since 2014, with the most articles from the United States (21%). Most studies (80.8%) focused on manufacturing custom boluses and testing 3D printing materials, whereas 19.2% explored creating molds for boluses. CT scans were the primary method for defining the bolus area (88.6%). The publications included three study types: dosimetric evaluations, evaluations with anthropomorphic phantoms, and clinical case studies. Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) was the most common printing technique (88.1%), with Polylactic Acid (PLA) being the most frequently used material (57.1%). Challenges included ensuring proper fit, assessing material properties, and managing printing time. The outcomes of this review suggest that 3D printing technology holds significant promise for improving radiotherapy by creating custom-fit boluses. 3D-printed boluses demonstrated notable advantages, such as improved dose distribution, better bolus conformity, and reduced setup times. However, several limitations have been identified, including considerable variability in study designs, making it challenging to draw generalized conclusions. Some studies had small sample sizes or did not clearly report methodological details. Addressing these issues will help to optimize technology's implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":47283,"journal":{"name":"Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy","volume":"30 1","pages":"100-113"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11999008/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5603/rpor.104014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The goal of this study was to evaluate the current literature covering the topic of 3D-printed radiotherapy boluses in the context of fabrication methods, materials, and clinical outcomes. This systematic review followed the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Data were extracted for authors, publication details, application type, printing technique and materials, study type, radiation type, reported outcomes and implementation difficulties. The search yielded 161 articles, 52 of which met the inclusion criteria. Publications on 3D printing for customized boluses have increased since 2014, with the most articles from the United States (21%). Most studies (80.8%) focused on manufacturing custom boluses and testing 3D printing materials, whereas 19.2% explored creating molds for boluses. CT scans were the primary method for defining the bolus area (88.6%). The publications included three study types: dosimetric evaluations, evaluations with anthropomorphic phantoms, and clinical case studies. Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) was the most common printing technique (88.1%), with Polylactic Acid (PLA) being the most frequently used material (57.1%). Challenges included ensuring proper fit, assessing material properties, and managing printing time. The outcomes of this review suggest that 3D printing technology holds significant promise for improving radiotherapy by creating custom-fit boluses. 3D-printed boluses demonstrated notable advantages, such as improved dose distribution, better bolus conformity, and reduced setup times. However, several limitations have been identified, including considerable variability in study designs, making it challenging to draw generalized conclusions. Some studies had small sample sizes or did not clearly report methodological details. Addressing these issues will help to optimize technology's implementation.

3D打印在个性化放射治疗中的应用:系统综述。
本研究的目的是评估目前关于3d打印放疗丸的制作方法、材料和临床结果的文献。本系统评价遵循PRISMA 2020指南。提取作者、出版物详细信息、应用类型、印刷技术和材料、研究类型、辐射类型、报告结果和实施困难等数据。检索得到161篇文章,其中52篇符合纳入标准。自2014年以来,关于定制胶囊3D打印的出版物有所增加,其中来自美国的文章最多(21%)。大多数研究(80.8%)专注于制造定制丸和测试3D打印材料,而19.2%的研究探索了为丸创建模具。CT扫描是确定病灶面积的主要方法(88.6%)。这些出版物包括三种研究类型:剂量学评估、拟人化幻影评估和临床病例研究。熔融沉积建模(FDM)是最常用的打印技术(88.1%),聚乳酸(PLA)是最常用的材料(57.1%)。挑战包括确保合适的贴合、评估材料性能和管理打印时间。这篇综述的结果表明,3D打印技术通过制造定制的胶囊来改善放射治疗具有重要的前景。3d打印药丸显示出显著的优势,如改善剂量分布、更好的药丸一致性和减少安装时间。然而,已经确定了一些局限性,包括研究设计的相当大的可变性,使得得出概括的结论具有挑战性。一些研究的样本量很小,或者没有清楚地报告方法细节。解决这些问题将有助于优化技术的实施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
8.30%
发文量
115
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy is an interdisciplinary bimonthly journal, publishing original contributions in clinical oncology and radiotherapy, as well as in radiotherapy physics, techniques and radiotherapy equipment. Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy is a journal of the Polish Society of Radiation Oncology, the Czech Society of Radiation Oncology, the Hungarian Society for Radiation Oncology, the Slovenian Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology, the Polish Study Group of Head and Neck Cancer, the Guild of Bulgarian Radiotherapists and the Greater Poland Cancer Centre, affiliated with the Spanish Society of Radiotherapy and Oncology, the Italian Association of Radiotherapy and the Portuguese Society of Radiotherapy - Oncology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信