R. Rajesh, T. Gopenath, Kanthesh M. Basalingappa, Shanmukhappa Kaginelli
{"title":"Simulated three-dimensional printing printed polyamide based PA2200 immovable device for cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy","authors":"R. Rajesh, T. Gopenath, Kanthesh M. Basalingappa, Shanmukhappa Kaginelli","doi":"10.4103/jrcr.jrcr_28_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Radiotherapy is one of the most effective treatments for cancer. However, delivering an optimal dosage of radiation to the patients is always challenging due to the movements of the patient during treatment. Immobilization devices are typically used to minimize patient movement. Aims: The current work has been carried out to investigate the effectiveness of Three-dimensional printing (3D) printing to create patient-specific immobilization devices in comparison to traditional devices. Earlier studies have reported the advantages of 3D printed materials in the form of phantoms included improved patient experience and comfort over traditional methods. Further, high levels of accuracy between immobilizer and patient, reproducibility, and similar beam attenuation properties were better achieved compared to conventional or thermoformed immobilizers. Methods: The additive manufacturing process, however, is considered time-consuming as it requires time to print the desired shape. In the current study, polyamide-based PA 2200 which is biocompatible was used as source material for printing the customized Immobilize devices for radiotherapy. Results: Computer-aided designing (CAD) was used to design following the computer tomography scan of patients. The design was fed to the 3D printer for further processing. Conclusions: The mechanical properties of materials are important to receive the geometrical requirement that fits every patient. We used PA 2200, which is more biocompatible compared to other materials to produce phantoms using the system-generated design of the patient geometry. Further, phantoms produced did not show much deviation in radio fractionation when compared to the thermoplastic molds.","PeriodicalId":16923,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Radiation and Cancer Research","volume":"15 1","pages":"180 - 185"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Radiation and Cancer Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jrcr.jrcr_28_21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Radiotherapy is one of the most effective treatments for cancer. However, delivering an optimal dosage of radiation to the patients is always challenging due to the movements of the patient during treatment. Immobilization devices are typically used to minimize patient movement. Aims: The current work has been carried out to investigate the effectiveness of Three-dimensional printing (3D) printing to create patient-specific immobilization devices in comparison to traditional devices. Earlier studies have reported the advantages of 3D printed materials in the form of phantoms included improved patient experience and comfort over traditional methods. Further, high levels of accuracy between immobilizer and patient, reproducibility, and similar beam attenuation properties were better achieved compared to conventional or thermoformed immobilizers. Methods: The additive manufacturing process, however, is considered time-consuming as it requires time to print the desired shape. In the current study, polyamide-based PA 2200 which is biocompatible was used as source material for printing the customized Immobilize devices for radiotherapy. Results: Computer-aided designing (CAD) was used to design following the computer tomography scan of patients. The design was fed to the 3D printer for further processing. Conclusions: The mechanical properties of materials are important to receive the geometrical requirement that fits every patient. We used PA 2200, which is more biocompatible compared to other materials to produce phantoms using the system-generated design of the patient geometry. Further, phantoms produced did not show much deviation in radio fractionation when compared to the thermoplastic molds.