Evaluation of 3D printed contrast detail phantoms for mammography quality assurance
(2022) 16th International Workshop on Breast Imaging, IWBI 2022 In Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering 12286.- Abstract
Objects created by 3D printers are increasingly used in various medical applications. Today, affordable 3D printers, using Fused Deposition Modeling are widely available. In this project, a commercially available 3D printer was used to replicate a conventional radiographic contrast detail phantom. Printing materials were selected by comparing their x-ray attenuation properties. Two replicas were printed using polylactic acid, with different filling patterns. The printed phantoms were imaged by a clinical mammography system, using automatic exposure control. Phantom images were visually and quantitively compared to images of the corresponding conventional contrast detail phantom. Visual scoring of the contrast detail elements was... (More)
Objects created by 3D printers are increasingly used in various medical applications. Today, affordable 3D printers, using Fused Deposition Modeling are widely available. In this project, a commercially available 3D printer was used to replicate a conventional radiographic contrast detail phantom. Printing materials were selected by comparing their x-ray attenuation properties. Two replicas were printed using polylactic acid, with different filling patterns. The printed phantoms were imaged by a clinical mammography system, using automatic exposure control. Phantom images were visually and quantitively compared to images of the corresponding conventional contrast detail phantom. Visual scoring of the contrast detail elements was performed by a medical physics student. Contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) was calculated for each phantom element. The diameter and thickness of the smallest visible phantom object were 0.44 mm and 0.09 mm, respectively, for both filling patterns. For the conventional phantom, the diameter and thickness of the smallest visible object were 0.31 mm and 0.09 mm. Visual inspection of printed phantoms revealed some linear artefacts. These artefacts were however not visible on mammographic projections. Quantitively, average CNR of printed phantom objects followed the same trend with an increase of average CNR with increasing disk height. However, there is a limitation of detail objects with disk diameters below 1.25 mm, caused by the available nozzle size. Based upon the encouraging results, future work will explore the use of different materials and smaller nozzle diameters.
(Less)
- author
- Boll, Måns ; Vent, Trevor ; Tomic, Hanna LU ; Bernhardsson, Christian LU ; Dustler, Magnus LU ; Tingberg, Anders LU and Bakic, Predrag R. LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2022
- type
- Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- 3D printing, contrast detail phantom, contrast-tonoise ratio, Mammography quality assurance, visual analysis
- host publication
- 16th International Workshop on Breast Imaging, IWBI 2022
- series title
- Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering
- editor
- Bosmans, Hilde ; Marshall, Nicholas and Van Ongeval, Chantal
- volume
- 12286
- article number
- 122860J
- publisher
- SPIE
- conference name
- 16th International Workshop on Breast Imaging, IWBI 2022
- conference location
- Leuven, Belgium
- conference dates
- 2022-05-22 - 2022-05-25
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85136127262
- ISSN
- 0277-786X
- 1996-756X
- ISBN
- 9781510655843
- DOI
- 10.1117/12.2625732
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 1a846998-b43a-4388-b5b8-296bc0ff23f0
- date added to LUP
- 2022-10-20 12:40:48
- date last changed
- 2024-04-04 12:49:22
@inproceedings{1a846998-b43a-4388-b5b8-296bc0ff23f0, abstract = {{<p>Objects created by 3D printers are increasingly used in various medical applications. Today, affordable 3D printers, using Fused Deposition Modeling are widely available. In this project, a commercially available 3D printer was used to replicate a conventional radiographic contrast detail phantom. Printing materials were selected by comparing their x-ray attenuation properties. Two replicas were printed using polylactic acid, with different filling patterns. The printed phantoms were imaged by a clinical mammography system, using automatic exposure control. Phantom images were visually and quantitively compared to images of the corresponding conventional contrast detail phantom. Visual scoring of the contrast detail elements was performed by a medical physics student. Contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) was calculated for each phantom element. The diameter and thickness of the smallest visible phantom object were 0.44 mm and 0.09 mm, respectively, for both filling patterns. For the conventional phantom, the diameter and thickness of the smallest visible object were 0.31 mm and 0.09 mm. Visual inspection of printed phantoms revealed some linear artefacts. These artefacts were however not visible on mammographic projections. Quantitively, average CNR of printed phantom objects followed the same trend with an increase of average CNR with increasing disk height. However, there is a limitation of detail objects with disk diameters below 1.25 mm, caused by the available nozzle size. Based upon the encouraging results, future work will explore the use of different materials and smaller nozzle diameters.</p>}}, author = {{Boll, Måns and Vent, Trevor and Tomic, Hanna and Bernhardsson, Christian and Dustler, Magnus and Tingberg, Anders and Bakic, Predrag R.}}, booktitle = {{16th International Workshop on Breast Imaging, IWBI 2022}}, editor = {{Bosmans, Hilde and Marshall, Nicholas and Van Ongeval, Chantal}}, isbn = {{9781510655843}}, issn = {{0277-786X}}, keywords = {{3D printing; contrast detail phantom; contrast-tonoise ratio; Mammography quality assurance; visual analysis}}, language = {{eng}}, publisher = {{SPIE}}, series = {{Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering}}, title = {{Evaluation of 3D printed contrast detail phantoms for mammography quality assurance}}, url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/12.2625732}}, doi = {{10.1117/12.2625732}}, volume = {{12286}}, year = {{2022}}, }