Skip to main content

A radiopaque 3D printed, anthropomorphic phantom for simulation of CT-guided procedures

We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

Objectives

To develop an anthropomorphic phantom closely mimicking patient anatomy and to evaluate the phantom for the simulation of computed tomography (CT)-guided procedures.

Methods

Patient CT images were printed with aqueous potassium iodide solution (1 g/mL) on paper. The printed paper sheets were stacked in alternation with 1-mm thick polyethylene foam layers, cut to the patient shape and glued together to create an anthropomorphic abdomen phantom. Ten interventional radiologists performed periradicular infiltration on the phantom and rated the phantom procedure regarding different aspects of suitability for simulating CT-guided procedures.

Results

Radiopaque printing in combination with polyethylene foam layers achieved a phantom with detailed patient anatomy that allowed needle placement. CT-guided periradicular infiltration on the phantom was rated highly realistic for simulation of anatomy, needle navigation and overall course of the procedure. Haptics were rated as intermediately realistic. Participants strongly agreed that the phantom was suitable for training and learning purposes.

Conclusions

A radiopaque 3D printed, anthropomorphic phantom provides a realistic platform for the simulation of CT-guided procedures. Future work will focus on application for training and procedure optimisation.

Key Points

Radiopaque 3D printing combined with polyethylene foam achieves patient phantoms for CT-guided procedures.

Radiopaque 3D printed, anthropomorphic phantoms allow realistic simulation of CT-guided procedures.

Realistic visual guidance is a key aspect in simulation of CT-guided procedures.

Three-dimensional printed phantoms provide a platform for training and optimisation of CT-guided procedures.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  1. 1.

    Ahlberg G, Enochsson L, Gallagher AG et al (2007) Proficiency-based virtual reality training significantly reduces the error rate for residents during their first 10 laparoscopic cholecystectomies. Am J Surg 193:797–804

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    MacDonald J, Ketchum J, Williams RG, Rogers LQ (2003) A lay person versus a trained endoscopist: can the preop endoscopy simulator detect a difference? Surg Endosc 17:896–898

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Waterman BR, Martin KD, Cameron KL, Owens BD, Belmont PJ (2016) Simulation training improves surgical proficiency and safety during diagnostic shoulder arthroscopy performed by residents. Orthopedics 39:e479–e485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Thomsen AS, Bach-Holm D, Kjærbo H et al (2017) Operating room performance improves after proficiency-based virtual reality cataract surgery Training. Ophthalmology 124:524–531

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Draycott TJ, Crofts JF, Ash JP et al (2008) Improving neonatal outcome through practical shoulder dystocia training. Obstet Gynecol 112:14–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Pannell JS, Santiago-Dieppa DR, Wali AR et al (2016) Simulator-based angiography and endovascular neurosurgery curriculum: a longitudinal evaluation of performance following simulator-based angiography training. Cureus 8:e756

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Barsuk JH, McGaghie WC, Cohen ER, O'Leary KJ, Wayne DB (2009) Simulation-based mastery learning reduces complications during central venous catheter insertion in a medical intensive care unit. Crit Care Med 37:2697–2701

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Zendejas B, Cook DA, Bingener J et al (2011) Simulation-based mastery learning improves patient outcomes in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 254:502–509 discussion 509-511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Cohen ER, Feinglass J, Barsuk JH et al (2010) Cost savings from reduced catheter-related bloodstream infection after simulation-based education for residents in a medical intensive care unit. Simul Healthc 5:98–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Gomoll AH, O'Toole RV, Czarnecki J, Warner JJ (2007) Surgical experience correlates with performance on a virtual reality simulator for shoulder arthroscopy. Am J Sports Med 35:883–888

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Dimmick S, Jones M, Challen J, Iedema J, Wattuhewa U, Coucher J (2007) CT-guided procedures: evaluation of a phantom system to teach accurate needle placement. Clin Radiol 62:166–171

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Mendiratta-Lala M, Williams TR, Mendiratta V, Ahmed H, Bonnett JW (2015) Simulation center training as a means to improve resident performance in percutaneous noncontinuous CT-guided fluoroscopic procedures with dose reduction. AJR Am J Roentgenol 204:W376–W383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Gruber-Rouh T, Lee C, Bolck J et al (2015) Intervention planning using a laser navigation system for ct-guided interventions: a phantom and patient study. Korean J Radiol 16:729–735

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Jacobi V, Thalhammer A, Kirchner J (1999) Value of a laser guidance system for CT interventions: a phantom study. Eur Radiol 9:137–140

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Moser C, Becker J, Deli M, Busch M, Boehme M, Groenemeyer DH (2013) A novel Laser Navigation System reduces radiation exposure and improves accuracy and workflow of CT-guided spinal interventions: a prospective, randomized, controlled, clinical trial in comparison to conventional freehand puncture. Eur J Radiol 82:627–632

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Nitta N, Takahashi M, Tanaka T et al (2007) Laser-guided computed tomography puncture system: simulation experiments using artificial phantom lesions and preliminary clinical experience. Radiat Med 25:187–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Jahnke P, Limberg FR, Gerbl A et al (2017) Radiopaque three-dimensional printing: a method to create realistic CT phantoms. Radiology 282:569–575

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Feigl GC, Dreu M, Kastner M et al (2017) Thermocoagulation of the medial branch of the dorsal branch of the lumbal spinal nerve: flouroscopy versus CT. Pain Med 18:36–40

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Kroes MW, Busser WM, Fütterer JJ et al (2013) Assessment of needle guidance devices for their potential to reduce fluoroscopy time and operator hand dose during C-arm cone-beam computed tomography-guided needle interventions. J Vasc Interv Radiol 24:901–906

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Schulz B, Eichler K, Siebenhandl P et al (2013) Accuracy and speed of robotic assisted needle interventions using a modern cone beam computed tomography intervention suite: a phantom study. Eur Radiol 23:198–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Won HJ, Kim N, Kim GB, Seo JB, Kim H (2017) Validation of a CT-guided intervention robot for biopsy and radiofrequency ablation: experimental study with an abdominal phantom. Diagn Interv Radiol 23:233–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Christian Althoff, Torsten Diekhoff, Felix Doellinger, Ahi Sema Issever, Matthias Rief, Valentina Romano, Musaab Saleh, Regina Thiel and Elke Zimmermann of the Department of Radiology, Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin.

Funding

This study has received funding by the Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Energie (DE): 03EFHBE093.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul Jahnke.

Ethics declarations

Guarantor

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Dr. Paul Jahnke.

Conflict of interest

The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Patents

Patent applications for the 3D printing method were filed by Dr. Jahnke and PD Dr. Scheel: DE202015104282U1, EP000003135199A1, US020170042501A1.

Statistics and biometry

No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was waived by the Institutional Review Board.

Ethical approval

Institutional Review Board approval was obtained.

Methodology

• prospective

• observational

• performed at one institution

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jahnke, P., Schwarz, F.B., Ziegert, M. et al. A radiopaque 3D printed, anthropomorphic phantom for simulation of CT-guided procedures. Eur Radiol 28, 4818–4823 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5481-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • Printing, three-dimensional
  • Phantoms, imaging
  • Fluoroscopy
  • Tomography, X-ray computed
  • Simulation training