Optimising total knee replacement imaging: a novel 3D printed PET/CT anthropomorphic phantom for metal artefact simulation.
3D printing
Bone
PET/CT
Phantom
TKR
Total knee replacement
Journal
EJNMMI physics
ISSN: 2197-7364
Titre abrégé: EJNMMI Phys
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101658952
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 Mar 2024
28 Mar 2024
Historique:
received:
07
11
2023
accepted:
20
03
2024
medline:
28
3
2024
pubmed:
28
3
2024
entrez:
28
3
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Arthroplasty phantoms, including total knee replacement (TKR) phantoms, have been frequently used to test metal artefact reduction methods applied to positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) images. These phantoms generally simulate either simple anatomical features or simple activity distribution around the metal inserts in the PET/CT scans. 3D printing has been used recently to fabricate fillable anthropomorphic phantoms that accurately simulate volume and geometry. This study aims to describe the process of image segmentation, phantom modelling, 3D printing and validation of a population-based fillable TKR phantom that simulates human TKR PET/CT metal artefacts. 10 participants (5 male and 5 female) were scanned using 3T MRI and the images were segmented to create average male and average female 3D knee models, inversely with void cortical and porous trabecular compartments for 3D printing and contrast media. Virtual total knee replacement (TKR) surgery was implemented on these models to prepare the insertion locations for knee prosthetic implants. Subsequently, TKR models were printed using a 3D photopolymer resin printer and then injected with normal saline to test the phantoms for any leaks. Subsequently, diluted iodinated contrast media was injected into the cortical compartment and saline with Phantoms were shown to be fluid-tight with distinct compartments. They showed comparable volume and geometry to the segmented human MRI knees. The phantoms demonstrated similar values for x-ray attenuation and Hounsfield units (HU) to the literature for both cortical and trabecular compartments. The phantoms displayed a uniform distribution for the radioactive tracer, resembling that seen in human trabecular bone PET. TKR phantom PET/CT images with metal inserts replicated the clinical metal artefacts seen clinically in the periprosthetic area. This novel, 3D-printed, and customisable phantom effectively mimics the geometric, radiographic and radiotracer distribution features of real TKRs. Importantly, it simulates TKR image metal artefacts, making it suitable for repeatable and comprehensive evaluation of various metal artefact reduction methods in future research.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38538815
doi: 10.1186/s40658-024-00634-2
pii: 10.1186/s40658-024-00634-2
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
31Subventions
Organisme : Saudi Arabia Cultural Bureau in London
ID : KU122
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Assiri R, Knapp K, Fulford J, Chen J. Correlation of the quantitative methods for the measurement of bone uptake and plasma clearance of 18F-NaF using positron emission tomography. Systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol. 2022;146:110081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.110081 .
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.110081
pubmed: 34911006
Gholamrezanezhad A, Basques K, Batouli A, Matcuk G, Alavi A, Jadvar H. Clinical nononcologic applications of PET/CT and PET/MRI in musculoskeletal, orthopedic, and rheumatologic imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2018;210:W245–63. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.17.18523 .
doi: 10.2214/ajr.17.18523
pubmed: 29787313
pmcid: 7469956
William R, Ali G, Soren H, Austin B, Siavash Mehdizadeh S, Donald D, et al. Applications of FDG- and NaF-PET in musculoskeletal disorders. J Nucl Med. 2021;62:2004.
Beheshti M. (18)F-sodium fluoride PET/CT and PET/MR imaging of bone and joint disorders. PET Clin. 2018;13:477–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpet.2018.05.004 .
doi: 10.1016/j.cpet.2018.05.004
pubmed: 30219183
Sörensen J, Ullmark G. PET scanning for evaluation of bone metabolism. Acta Orthop. 2009;80:737–9. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453670903487040 .
doi: 10.3109/17453670903487040
pmcid: 2823309
McGarry CK, Grattan LJ, Ivory AM, Leek F, Liney GP, Liu Y, et al. Tissue mimicking materials for imaging and therapy phantoms: a review. Phys Med Biol. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/abbd17 .
doi: 10.1088/1361-6560/abbd17
pubmed: 32998112
Filippou V, Tsoumpas C. Recent advances on the development of phantoms using 3D printing for imaging with CT, MRI, PET, SPECT, and ultrasound. Med Phys. 2018;45:e740–60.
doi: 10.1002/mp.13058
pubmed: 29933508
Niebuhr NI, Johnen W, Güldaglar T, Runz A, Echner G, Mann P, et al. Technical note: radiological properties of tissue surrogates used in a multimodality deformable pelvic phantom for MR-guided radiotherapy. Med Phys. 2016;43:908–16. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4939874 .
doi: 10.1118/1.4939874
pubmed: 26843251
Mohammed Ali A, Hogg P, Johansen S, England A. Construction and validation of a low cost paediatric pelvis phantom. Eur J Radiol. 2018;108:84–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2018.09.015 .
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2018.09.015
pubmed: 30396676
Jahnke P, Limberg FRP, Gerbl A, Ardila Pardo GL, Braun VPB, Hamm B, Scheel M. Radiopaque three-dimensional printing: a method to create realistic CT phantoms. Radiology. 2017;282:569–75. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2016152710 .
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2016152710
pubmed: 27626676
Dancewicz OL, Sylvander SR, Markwell TS, Crowe SB, Trapp JV. Radiological properties of 3D printed materials in kilovoltage and megavoltage photon beams. Phys Med. 2017;38:111–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2017.05.051 .
doi: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2017.05.051
pubmed: 28610691
Ceh J, Youd T, Mastrovich Z, Peterson C, Khan S, Sasser T, et al. Bismuth infusion of ABS enables additive manufacturing of complex radiological phantoms and shielding equipment. Sensors. 2017;17:459. https://doi.org/10.3390/s17030459 .
doi: 10.3390/s17030459
pubmed: 28245589
pmcid: 5375745
Santos JCC, Negreiros FR, Pedroza LS, Dalpian GM, Miranda PB. Interaction of water with the gypsum (010) surface: structure and dynamics from nonlinear vibrational spectroscopy and Ab initio molecular dynamics. J Am Chem Soc. 2018;140:17141–52. https://doi.org/10.1021/jacs.8b09907 .
doi: 10.1021/jacs.8b09907
pubmed: 30507120
Abdul Razak HR, Nordin AJ, Ackerly T, Van Every B, Martin R, Geso M. Quantifying the effects of iodine contrast media on standardised uptake values of FDG PET/CT images: an anthropomorphic phantom study. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med. 2011;34:367–74.
doi: 10.1007/s13246-011-0088-y
pubmed: 21786083
Ahmed I, Sullivan K, Priye A. Multi-resin masked stereolithography (MSLA) 3D printing for rapid and inexpensive prototyping of microfluidic chips with integrated functional components. Biosensors. 2022;12:652. https://doi.org/10.3390/bios12080652 .
doi: 10.3390/bios12080652
pubmed: 36005047
pmcid: 9405740
Adesanya O, Sprowson A, Masters J, Hutchinson C. Review of the role of dynamic 18F-NaF PET in diagnosing and distinguishing between septic and aseptic loosening in hip prosthesis. J Orthop Surg Res. 2015;10:1–5.
doi: 10.1186/s13018-014-0147-7
CHITUBOX. Chitubox slicer software. 2023.
Miller SH, Hashemian A, Gillihan R, Helms E. A comparison of mobile phone LiDAR capture and established ground based 3D scanning methodologies. SAE International; 2022.
doi: 10.4271/2022-01-0832
3D P. which exposure finder should I use? ; 2022.
Jusufbegović M, Pandžić A, Šehić A, Jašić R, Julardžija F, Vegar-Zubović S, Beganović A. Computed tomography tissue equivalence of 3D printing materials. Radiography. 2022;28:788–92.
doi: 10.1016/j.radi.2022.02.008
pubmed: 35264301
Patrick S, Praveen Birur N, Gurushanth K, Shubhasini Raghavan A, Gurudath S. Comparison of gray values of cone-beam computed tomography with hounsfield units of multislice computed tomography: an: in vitro: study. Indian J Dent Res. 2017;28:66–70. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_415_16 .
doi: 10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_415_16
pubmed: 28393820
de Dreuille O, Strijckmans V, Ameida P, Loc’h C, Bendriem B. Bone equivalent liquid solution to assess accuracy of transmission measurements in SPECT and PET. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1997;44:1186–90.
doi: 10.1109/23.596985
Chen M-K, Menard DH, Cheng DW. Determining the minimal required radioactivity of 18F-FDG for reliable semiquantification in PET/CT imaging: a phantom study. J Nucl Med Technol. 2016;44:26–30. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnmt.115.165258 .
doi: 10.2967/jnmt.115.165258
pubmed: 26769598
Cloonan AJ, Shahmirzadi D, Li RX, Doyle BJ, Konofagou EE, Mcgloughlin TM. 3D-printed tissue-mimicking phantoms for medical imaging and computational validation applications. 3D Print Addit Manuf. 2014;1:14–23.
doi: 10.1089/3dp.2013.0010
pubmed: 28804733
Tins B, Kuiper JH. Building an orthopaedic CT phantom for under £50. Br J Radiol. 2019;92:20180279. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20180279 .
doi: 10.1259/bjr.20180279
pubmed: 30379580
Zarb F, Rainford L, McEntee MF. Image quality assessment tools for optimization of CT images. Radiography. 2010;16:147–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2009.10.002 .
doi: 10.1016/j.radi.2009.10.002
Van Der Vos CS, Arens AIJ, Hamill JJ, Hofmann C, Panin VY, Meeuwis APW, et al. Metal artifact reduction of CT scans to improve PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2017;58:1867–72. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.117.191171 .
doi: 10.2967/jnumed.117.191171
pubmed: 28490470
Kennedy JA, Israel O, Frenkel A, Bar-Shalom R, Azhari H. The reduction of artifacts due to metal hip implants in CT-attenuation corrected PET images from hybrid PET/CT scanners. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2007;45:553–62.
doi: 10.1007/s11517-007-0188-8
pubmed: 17520306
Wang Z, Bovik AC, Sheikh HR, Simoncelli EP. Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE Trans Image Process. 2004;13:600–12. https://doi.org/10.1109/tip.2003.819861 .
doi: 10.1109/tip.2003.819861
pubmed: 15376593
Abdoli M, Mehranian A, Ailianou A, Becker M, Zaidi H. Comparative methods for metal artifact reduction in x-ray CT. IEEE.
Arabi H, Zaidi H. Deep learning–based metal artefact reduction in PET/CT imaging. Eur Radiol. 2021;31:6384–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-07709-z .
doi: 10.1007/s00330-021-07709-z
pubmed: 33569626
pmcid: 8270868
Andersson KM, Nowik P, Persliden J, Thunberg P, Norrman E. Metal artefact reduction in CT imaging of hip prostheses—an evaluation of commercial techniques provided by four vendors. Br J Radiol. 2015;88:20140473. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20140473 .
doi: 10.1259/bjr.20140473
pubmed: 26110201
pmcid: 4651384
Raja V, Fernandes KJ. Reverse engineering: an industrial perspective. Cham: Springer; 2007.
Kim JH. Three principles for radiation safety: time, distance, and shielding. Korean J Pain. 2018;31:145–6. https://doi.org/10.3344/kjp.2018.31.3.145 .
doi: 10.3344/kjp.2018.31.3.145
pubmed: 30013728
pmcid: 6037814