Evaluates imaging performance of breast phantoms using different materials and STL methods, suggesting better designs for imaging technologies.
Anthropomorphic breast phantoms are increasingly used for the development and evaluation of breast imaging technologies. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impacts of the material combination and stereolithography or Standard Tessellation Language (STL) export methodology on the multimodal imaging performance of patient-derived breast phantoms. A breast model derived from segmented magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data was used to fabricate four multi-material phantom sections representing adipose- and glandular-equivalent regions. Two material combinations—acrylic styrene acrylonitrile and high-impact polystyrene (ASA-HIPS) and acrylic styrene acrylonitrile and acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ASA-ABS)—and two STL export procedures were evaluated, including a conventional mesh-based workflow and an in-house voxel-preserving approach designed to eliminate interface gaps. The phantoms were imaged using clinical computed tomography (CT), mammography, and digital breast tomosynthesis systems. Quantitative evaluation included contrast-based image characteristics and region of interest-based intensity distribution analysis. The results showed that ASA-HIPS phantoms demonstrated higher inter-material contrast and greater attenuation separation than ASA-ABS across all imaging modalities. The voxel-preserving STL export procedure improved physical interface integrity and eliminated visible inter-material gaps, while producing only minor differences in global radiological metrics compared with the conventional workflow. CT imaging of the breast samples acquired at 70 kVp showed attenuation characteristics consistent with clinically reported Hounsfield unit ranges for low-density breast tissues observed in clinical CT examinations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dukov et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: