ArticleEJNMMI physics2025
3D printing of radioactive wall-less PET phantoms improves threshold-based target delineation and quantification.
Article in EJNMMI physics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Applications of artificial intelligence in nuclear medicine.Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik · 2026Review
- Enhancing PET/CT target assessment with porous 3D printed grids: a pilot study.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundValidation of threshold-based PET segmentation and PET quantification is typically performed with fillable phantoms. Theoretical considerations show that the inactive walls of the phantom cavities introduce a contrast dependence of the volume-reproducing threshold (VRT), potentially leading to segmentation errors and therefore miscalculations of target volumes. The goal of this study was to experimentally show the contrast independence of the VRT when using wall-less phantoms.
resultsRadioactive spheres were produced according to NEMA specifications (D = 10/13/17/22/28/37 mm) using a stereolithographic (SLA) 3D printer. For comparison, hollow spheres were filled with a similar activity concentration. Image data from both sphere types were acquired with five different signal-to-background ratios (SBR = 2/4/6/8/10) using a Siemens mCT 20 and a Biograph 64 TruePoint PET/CT system. Results from wall-less and fillable spheres were compared to evaluate contrast dependence and segmentation accuracy based on VRT and intensity profiles. Wall-less phantoms demonstrated consistent VRT values, with a coefficient of variation of 2% over all SBRs, indicating independence from contrast. Conversely, fillable phantoms exhibited significant VRT variability, with a coefficient of variation (CV) of 9% over all SBRs and up to 40% volume overestimation at low contrast. Additionally, activity distribution in the printed spheres was evaluated using PET-based statistical analysis and autoradiography. The PET intensity distribution in the printed material was highly uniform (CV = 4.2%), with a Kullback-Leibler divergence near zero and no statistically significant difference to the fillable spheres. Autoradiography revealed microscopic regions with elevated counts, showing a CV of 11.7%, which was effectively reduced to 2.4% after Gaussian filtering.
conclusionsThe theoretical predictions of a significant influence of inactive walls in low-contrast images and contrast-independent VRT in wall-less phantoms were successfully confirmed. SLA 3D printing of phantoms is a promising method for the reliable evaluation of PET quantification methods, particularly in low-contrast scenarios commonly encountered in clinical settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.