Top

Strahlentherapie und Onkologie

Published in:

Open Access 13-06-2022 | Magnetic Resonance Imaging | Original Article

Evaluation of novel 3D-printed and conventional thermoplastic stereotactic high-precision patient fixation masks for radiotherapy

Authors: Veronika M. Miron, Tanja Etzelstorfer, Raimund Kleiser, Tobias Raffelsberger, Zoltan Major, Hans Geinitz

Published in: Strahlentherapie und Onkologie | Issue 11/2022

Abstract

Purpose

For stereotactic radiation therapy of intracranial malignancies, a patient’s head needs to be immobilized with high accuracy. Fixation devices such as invasive stereotactic head frames or non-invasive thermoplastic mask systems are often used. However, especially stereotactic high-precision masks often cause discomfort for patients due to a long manufacturing time during which the patient is required to lie still and because the face is covered, including the mouth, nose, eyes, and ears. To avoid these issues, the target was to develop a non-invasive 3D-printable mask system with at least the accuracy of the high-precision masks, for producing masks which can be manufactured in the absence of patients and which allow the eyes, mouth, and nose to be uncovered during therapy.

Methods

For four volunteers, a personalized 3D-printed mask based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data was designed and manufactured using fused filament fabrication (FFF). Additionally, for each of the volunteers, a conventional thermoplastic stereotactic high-precision mask from Brainlab AG (Munich, Germany) was fabricated. The intra-fractional fixation accuracy for each mask and volunteer was evaluated using the motion-correction algorithm of functional MRI measurements with and without guided motion.

Results

The average values for the translations and rotations of the volunteers’ heads lie in the range between ±1 mm and ±1° for both masks. Interestingly, the standard deviations and the relative and absolute 3D displacements are lower for the 3D-printed masks compared to the Brainlab masks.

Conclusion

It could be shown that the intra-fractional fixation accuracy of the 3D-printed masks was higher than for the conventional stereotactic high-precision masks.

Alheit H, Dornfeld S, Dawel M et al (2001) Patient position reproducibility in fractionated stereotactically guided conformal radiotherapy using the BrainLab® mask system. Strahlenther Onkol 177:264–268. https://doi.org/10.1007/PL00002407CrossRefPubMed

Babic S, Lee Y, Ruschin M et al (2018) To frame or not to frame? Cone-beam CT-based analysis of head immobilization devices specific to linac-based stereotactic radiosurgery and radiotherapy. J Appl Clin Med Phys 19:111–120. https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12251CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Bednarz G, Machtay M, Werner-Wasik M et al (2009) Report on a randomized trial comparing two forms of immobilization of the head for fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy. Med Phys 36:12–17. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3030950CrossRefPubMed

Boda-Heggemann J, Walter C, Rahn A et al (2006) Repositioning accuracy of two different mask systems-3D revisited: comparison using true 3D/3D matching with cone-beam CT. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 66:1568–1575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.08.054CrossRefPubMed

Engelsman M, Rosenthal SJ, Michaud SL et al (2005) Intra- and interfractional patient motion for a variety of immobilization devices. Med Phys 32:3468–3474. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.2089507CrossRefPubMed

Gilbeau L, Octave-Prignot M, Loncol T et al (2001) Comparison of setup accuracy of three different thermoplastic masks for the treatment of brain and head and neck tumors. Radiother Oncol 58:155–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8140(00)00280-2CrossRefPubMed

Tryggestad E, Christian M, Ford E et al (2011) Inter- and intrafraction patient positioning uncertainties for intracranial radiotherapy: a study of four frameless, thermoplastic mask-based immobilization strategies using daily cone-beam CT. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 80:281–290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.06.022CrossRefPubMed

Velec M, Waldron JN, O’Sullivan B et al (2010) Cone-beam CT assessment of Interfraction and Intrafraction setup error of two head-and-neck cancer thermoplastic masks. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 76:949–955. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.07.004CrossRefPubMed

Pang PPE, Hendry J, Cheah SL et al (2014) An assessment of the magnitude of intra-fraction movement of head-and-neck IMRT cases and its implication on the action-level of the imaging protocol. Radiother Oncol 112:437–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2014.09.008CrossRefPubMed

10.

Schell MC, Bova FJ, Larson DA et al (1995) AAPM report no. 54 stereotactic radiosurgery report of task group 42 radiation therapy committee

11.

The Royal College of Radiologists, Society and College of Radiographers, Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine (2008) On target: ensuring geometric accuracy in radiotherapy. The Royal College of Radiologists, London

12.

Márquez-Graña C, McGowan P, Cotterell M, Ares E (2017) Qualitative feasibility research to develop a novel approach for a design of a head support for radiosurgery or stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). Proc Manuf 13:1344–1351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2017.09.112CrossRef

13.

Pham QVV, Lavallée AP, Foias A et al (2018) Radiotherapy immobilization mask molding through the use of 3D-printed head models. Technol Cancer Res Treat 17:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/1533033818809051CrossRef

14.

Sanghera B, Amis A, McGurk M (2002) Preliminary study of potential for rapid prototype and surface scanned radiotherapy facemask production technique. J Med Eng Technol 26:16–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/03091900110102445CrossRefPubMed

15.

Fisher M, Applegate C, Ryalat M et al (2014) Evaluation of 3‑D printed immobilisation shells for head and neck IMRT. Open J Radiol 04:322–328. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojrad.2014.44042CrossRef

16.

Laycock SD, Hulse M, Scrase CD et al (2014) Towards the production of radiotherapy treatment shells on 3D printers using data derived from DICOM CT and MRI: preclinical feasibility studies. J Radiother Pract 14:92–98. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1460396914000326CrossRef

17.

Sato K, Takeda K, Dobashi S et al (2016) OC-0271: positional accuracy valuation of a three dimensional printed device for head and neck immobilisation. Radiother Oncol 119:S126–S127. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0167-8140(16)31520-1CrossRef

18.

Luo L, Wu W, Zhang P et al (2018) RONC-02. Comparison of 3D printed headrest for pediatric patients and Brainlab® SRS standard headrest in radiotherapy. Neuro Oncol 20:i174–i175. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/noy059.664CrossRefPubMedCentral

19.

Chen S, Lu Y, Hopfgartner C et al (2016) 3‑D printing based production of head and neck masks for radiation therapy using CT volume data: A fully automatic framework. In: Proceedings—international symposium on biomedical imaging. IEEE Computer Society, pp 403–406

20.

Haefner MF, Giesel FL, Mattke M et al (2018) 3D-Printed masks as a new approach for immobilization in radiotherapy—A study of positioning accuracy. Oncotarget 9:6490–6498. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.24032CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Asfia A, Novak JI, Rolfe B, Kron T (2021) Development of a patient-specific immobilisation facemask for radiation therapy using additive manufacturing, pressure sensors and topology optimisation. Rapid Prototyp J. https://doi.org/10.1108/rpj-09-2021-0241CrossRef

22.

Asfia A, Novak JI, Mohammed MI et al (2020) A review of 3D printed patient specific immobilisation devices in radiotherapy. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 13:30–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phro.2020.03.003CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

23.

Miron VM (2021) Additive manufacturing for medical applications. Johannes Kepler University, Linz

24.

McCarroll RE, Rubinstein AE, Kingsley CV et al (2015) 3D-printed small-animal immobilizer for use in preclinical radiotherapy. J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci 54:545–548PubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Meyer T, Quirk S, D’Souza M et al (2018) A framework for clinical commissioning of 3D-printed patient support or immobilization devices in photon radiotherapy. J Appl Clin Med Phys 19:499–505. https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12408CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Title: Evaluation of novel 3D-printed and conventional thermoplastic stereotactic high-precision patient fixation masks for radiotherapy
Authors: Veronika M. Miron
Tanja Etzelstorfer
Raimund Kleiser
Tobias Raffelsberger
Zoltan Major
Hans Geinitz
Publication date: 13-06-2022
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keywords: Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Radiotherapy
Published in: Strahlentherapie und Onkologie / Issue 11/2022
Print ISSN: 0179-7158
Electronic ISSN: 1439-099X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00066-022-01963-w

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Evaluation of novel 3D-printed and conventional thermoplastic stereotactic high-precision patient fixation masks for radiotherapy

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 11/2022

ORATOR2-Studie – randomisierter Vergleich einer primären Operation oder primären Strahlentherapie bei HPV-positivem Oropharynxkarzinom im Kontext einer Therapiedeeskalation

Impact of a ketogenic diet intervention during radiotherapy on body composition: V. Final results of the KETOCOMP study for head and neck cancer patients

Selective local postoperative radiotherapy for T3–T4 N0 laryngeal cancer

Impact of dosimetric factors on long-term percutaneous enteral gastrostomy (PEG) tube dependence in head and neck cancer patients after (chemo)radiotherapy—results from a prospective randomized trial

Intensity-modulated radiotherapy does not induce volumetric changes of the Bichat fat pad in nasopharyngeal cancer

Cost effectiveness and health-related quality of life of chemoradiotherapy versus radiation therapy alone in elderly head and neck cancer patients