Additive manufacturing (3D printing) in superficial brachytherapy

Robert Bellis; Agata Rembielak; Elizabeth A. Barnes; Moti Paudel; Ananth Ravi

doi:10.5114/jcb.2021.108602

eISSN: 2081-2841
ISSN: 1689-832X

Journal of Contemporary Brachytherapy

Current Issue Archive Supplements Articles in Press Journal Information Aims and Scope Editorial Office Editorial Board Register as Author Register as Reviewer Instructions for Authors Abstracting and indexing Subscription Advertising Information Links

Editorial System

Submit your Manuscript

4/2021
vol. 13

Send email

Copy url:

abstract:

Original paper

Additive manufacturing (3D printing) in superficial brachytherapy

Robert Bellis

¹

,

Agata Rembielak

^{2, 3}

,

Elizabeth A. Barnes

⁴

,

Moti Paudel

⁵

,

Ananth Ravi

⁶

Department of Physics, Ryerson University, Toronto, Canada
Department of Clinical Oncology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
Division of Cancer Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and Department of Medical Physics, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

J Contemp Brachytherapy 2021; 13, 4: 468–482

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5114/jcb.2021.108602

Online publish date: 2021/08/24

View full text Get citation

The aim of this work is to provide an overview of the current state of additive manufacturing (AM), commonly known as 3D printing, within superficial brachytherapy (BT). Several comprehensive database searches were performed to find publications linked to AM in superficial BT. Twenty-eight core publications were found, which can be grouped under general categories of clinical cases, physical and dosimetric evaluations, proof-of-concept cases, design process assessments, and economic feasibility studies. Each study demonstrated a success regarding AM implementation and collectively, they provided benefits over traditional applicator fabrication techniques. Publications of AM in superficial BT have increased significantly in the last 5 years. This is likely due to associated efficiency and consistency benefits; though, more evidences are needed to determine the true extent of these benefits.

keywords:

Additive manufacturing (3D printing) in superficial brachytherapy

Robert Bellis 1 , Agata Rembielak 2, 3 , Elizabeth A. Barnes 4 , Moti Paudel 5 , Ananth Ravi 6

additive manufacturing, 3D printing, brachytherapy, skin, superficial, applicator, keratinocyte carcinoma

Robert Bellis

¹

,

Agata Rembielak

^{2, 3}

,

Elizabeth A. Barnes

⁴

,

Moti Paudel

⁵

,

Ananth Ravi

⁶