3D scanning and printing skeletal tissues for anatomy education

Abstract

Detailed anatomical models can be produced with consumer-level 3D scanning and printing systems. 3D replication techniques are significant advances for anatomical education as they allow practitioners to more easily introduce diverse or numerous specimens into classrooms. Here we present a methodology for producing anatomical models in-house, with the chondrocranium cartilage from a spiny dogfish (Squalus acanthias) and the skeleton of a cane toad (Rhinella marina) as case studies. 3D digital replicas were produced using two consumer-level scanners and specimens were 3D-printed with selective laser sintering. The fidelity of the two case study models was determined with respect to key anatomical features. Larger-scale features of the dogfish chondrocranium and frog skeleton were all well-resolved and distinct in the 3D digital models, and many finer-scale features were also well-resolved, but some more subtle features were absent from the digital models (e.g. endolymphatic foramina in chondrocranium). All characters identified in the digital chondrocranium could be identified in the subsequent 3D print; however, three characters in the 3D-printed frog skeleton could not be clearly delimited (palatines, parasphenoid and pubis). Characters that were absent in the digital models or 3D prints had low-relief in the original scanned specimen and represent a minor loss of fidelity. Our method description and case studies show that minimal equipment and training is needed to produce durable skeletal specimens. These technologies support the tailored production of models for specific classes or research aims.

Production of accurate skeletal models of domestic animals using three‐dimensional scanning and printing technology

“…Almost all of the original anatomical characteristics of the biological specimens of the femur, the fifth rib, and the C6 vertebra were generally well‐resolved, except for the nutrient foramina on the bony surfaces. These results are consistent with those previously reported from other authors (Thomas et al, ). Measured dimensions of 3D printed models and digital models were compared with those of the original biological specimens, demonstrating no significant difference in between the originals and the replicated models.…”

“…In contrast, it costs at least USD 40.00 to purchase a bovine femur specimen. The educators in the current study could produce useful models relatively quickly and easily after minimal operational training on 3D scanner and 3D printer use (Manzano et al, ; Thomas et al, ). Scanning times for each specimen were between 5 and 45 minutes, and processing of point data into a 3D printable model took an additional 20–50 minutes.…”

“…Free scan was utilized to capture the interior of the vertebral foramen and other recessed structures which were not acquired by the automatic scan. Free scan mode was used for the femur and the fifth rib, while single scans from different perspectives were taken for each specimen and assembled to a point cloud according to a previously reported protocol (Thomas et al, ). The point clouds were then imported to Geomagic Studio version 2013 (Geomagic, Morrisville, NC) and rendered into digital models.…”

3D printing in zoological systematics: Integrative taxonomy ofLabrys chinensisgen. nov., sp. nov. (Nematoda: Tylenchomorpha)

“…Driven by new applications, the “printable” category keeps expanding into many fields such as medicine, architecture, education, fashion, manufacturing, even food (Lombardi, Hicks, Thompson, & Marbach‐Ad, ; Murphy & Atala, ; Petrick & Simpson, ; Qing et al., ; Sun, Peng, Yan, Fuh, & Hong, ; Thomas, Hiscox, Dixon, & Potgieter, ). Within zoology, it has already been showing great potential in functional morphology, pest detection, anatomy, and physiology (Domingue et al., ; Greco et al., ; Igic et al., ; Porter, Adriaens, Hatton, Meyers, & McKittrick, ; Thomas et al., ). Here, we extend the application of 3D printing to the field of taxonomy and describe for the first time a new taxon together with a printed model (Figure ).…”

Three‐dimensional printing of X‐ray computed tomography datasets with multiple materials using open‐source data processing

“…Additionally, 3D printed models have been used to build student understanding of disease (Esses et al, ; Bernhard et al, ), medical procedures (D'Urso et al, 2000; Torres et al, ), and anatomy (Esses et al, ; Kurenov et al, ; O'Reilly et al, ). Models have been found to be especially beneficial in anatomy education as they depict original samples, increase availability of rare and hard‐to‐visualize structures, and allow individuals to examine specimens at a variety of angles (AbouHashem et al, ; Thomas et al, ). Due to these capabilities, a convenient and cost‐effective means of producing these models would be a substantial benefit to anatomy education.…”