Background: In recent years, three-dimensional (3D) printing has been increasingly applied to the intracranial vasculature for patient-specific surgical planning, training, education, and research. Unfortunately, though, much of the prior literature regarding 3D printing has focused on the end-product and not the process. In addition, for 3D printing/manufacturing to occur on a large scale, challenges and bottlenecks specific to each modeled anatomy must be overcome. Main body: In this review article, limitations and considerations of each 3D printing processing step, as they relate to printing individual intracranial vasculature models and providing an active clinical service for a quaternary care center, are discussed. Relevant advantages and disadvantages of the available acquisition techniques (computed tomography, magnetic resonance, and digital subtraction angiography) are reviewed. Specific steps in segmentation, processing, and creation of a printable file may impede the workflow or degrade the fidelity of the printed model and are, therefore, given added attention. The various available printing techniques are compared with respect to printing the intracranial vasculature. Finally, applications are discussed, and a variety of example models are shown. Conclusion: In this review we provide insight into the manufacturing of 3D models of the intracranial vasculature that may facilitate incorporation into or improve utility of 3D vascular models in clinical practice.

Sinus compromise is common in patients with overlying skull fractures. Sinus compression can be distinguished from DVST on MDCT venography and is likely more prevalent than previously estimated. The fracture site may in part determine the pattern of compromise because fractures involving the transverse sinus-sigmoid sinus complex or multiple dural sinuses seem more likely to be affected by thrombosis than fractures involving the SSS.

No abstract

Purpose Radiology descriptions of intracranial metastases following radiotherapy are often imprecise. This study sought to improve such reports by creating and disseminating a structured template that encourages discrete categorization of intracranial lesions. Methods Following initiation of the structured template, a retrospective review assessed patients with intracranial metastases that underwent radiotherapy, comparing ‘pre-template’ with ‘post-template’ reports. A total of 139 patients were included; 94 patients (67.6%) were imaged pre-template, 45 (32.4%) post-template. Reports were assessed for discrete versus non-specific descriptions of lesions: ‘(presumed) new metastases’, ‘treated metastases’, and ‘indeterminate lesions’. Non-specific language was subdivided based on the type of lesion(s) described: e.g. ‘stable enhancing foci’ was deemed a non-specific description of ‘treated metastases’. Results Non-specific descriptions of lesions were used in 25/94 reports (26.6%) pre-template, and eight reports (17.8%) post-template. No significant difference was found in the frequency of inappropriate/ambiguous descriptions of intracranial lesions following template initiation ( P = 0.52). However, only 27/45 (60.0%) of the reports in the post-template time period used the structured report; the other reports were written as free prose. Of the reports that did use the structured template, the authors used significantly less ambiguous language structured template ( P = 0.02). Conclusion When utilized, a structured report template resulted in decreased non-specific descriptions and improved discrete characterization of intracranial metastases in patients treated with radiation. However, the frequency of non-specific language usage before and after template initiation was unchanged, probably due to poor compliance with template utilization.

No abstract