Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 5, 2025
Multimodal 3D Printing of Phantoms to Simulate Biological Tissue
Published on: January 11, 2020
Fabrication of a pediatric torso phantom with multiple tissues represented using a dual nozzle thermoplastic 3D
Matthew M Mille1, Keith T Griffin1, Roberto Maass-Moreno2
1Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, USA.
Purpose:
To demonstrate an on-demand and nearly automatic method for fabricating tissue-equivalent physical anthropomorphic phantoms for imaging and dosimetry applications using a dual nozzle thermoplastic three-dimensional (3D) printer and two types of plastic.
Methods:
Two 3D printing plastics were investigated: (a) Normal polylactic acid (PLA) as a soft tissue simulant and (b) Iron PLA (PLA-Fe), a composite of PLA and iron powder, as a bone simulant. The plastics and geometry of a 1-yr-old computational phantom were combined with a dual extrusion 3D printer to fabricate an anthropomorphic imaging phantom. The volumetric fill density of the 3D-printed parts was varied to approximate tissues of different radiographic density using a calibration curve relating the printer infill density setting to measured CT number. As a demonstration of our method we printed a 10 cm axial cross-section of the computational phantom's torso at full scale. We imaged the phantom on a CT scanner and compared HU values to those of a 1-yr-old patient and a commercial 5-yr-old physical phantom.
Results:
The phantom was printed in six parts over the course of a week. The printed phantom included 30 separate anatomical regions including soft tissue remainder, lungs (left and right), heart, esophagus, rib cage (left and right ribs 1 to 10), clavicles (left and right), scapulae (left and right), thoracic vertebrae (one solid object defining thoracic vertebrae T1 to T9). CT scanning of the phantom showed five distinct radiographic regions (heart, lung, soft tissue remainder, bone, and air cavity) despite using only two types of plastic. The 3D-printed phantom demonstrated excellent similarity to commercially available phantoms, although key limitations in the printer and printing materials leave opportunity for improvement.
Conclusion:
Patient-specific anthropomorphic phantoms can be 3D printed and assembled in sections for imaging and dosimetry applications. Such phantoms will be useful for dose verification purposes when commercial phantoms are unavailable for purchase in the specific anatomies of interest.
