ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to construct an anthropomorphic maxillofacial phantom for dental imaging and dosimetry purposes using three-dimensional (3D) printing technology and materials that simulate the radiographic properties of tissues. METHODS: Stereolithography photoreactive resins, polyurethane rubber and epoxy resin were modified by adding calcium carbonate and strontium carbonate powders or glass bubbles. These additives were used to change the materials' CT numbers to mimic various body tissues. A maxillofacial phantom was designed using CT images of a head. RESULTS: Commercial 3D printing resins were found to have CT numbers near 120 HU and were used to print intervertebral discs and an external skin for the maxillofacial phantom. By adding various amounts of calcium carbonate and strontium carbonate powders the CT number of the resin was raised to 1000 & 1500 HU and used to print bone mimics. Epoxy resin modified by adding glass bubbles was used in assembly and as a cartilaginous mimic. Glass bubbles were added to polyurethane rubber to reduce the CT number to simulate soft tissue and filled spaces between the printed anatomy and external skin of the phantom. CONCLUSION: The maxillofacial phantom designed for dental imaging and dosimetry constructed using 3D printing, polyurethane rubbers and epoxy resins represented a patient anatomically and radiographically. The results of the designed phantom, materials and assembly process can be applied to generate different phantoms that better represent diverse patient types and accommodate different ion chambers.
Subject(s)
Epoxy Resins , Rubber , Humans , Phantoms, Imaging , Polyurethanes , Printing, Three-Dimensional , Tomography, X-Ray ComputedABSTRACT
The Canadian Organization of Medical Physicists (COMP), in close partnership with the Canadian Partnership for Quality Radiotherapy (CPQR) has developed a series of Technical Quality Control (TQC) guidelines for radiation treatment equipment. These guidelines outline the performance objectives that equipment should meet in order to ensure an acceptable level of radiation treatment quality. The TQC guidelines have been rigorously reviewed and field tested in a variety of Canadian radiation treatment facilities. The development process enables rapid review and update to keep the guidelines current with changes in technology. This announcement provides an introduction to the guidelines, describing their scope and how they should be interpreted. Details of recommended tests can be found in separate, equipment specific TQC guidelines published in the JACMP (COMP Reports), or the website of the Canadian Partnership for Quality Radiotherapy (www.cpqr.ca).
