A Case Series of Rapid Prototyping and Intraoperative Imaging in Orbital Reconstruction

Lim, Christopher G. T.; Campbell, Duncan I.; Cook, Nick; Erasmus, J F P

doi:10.1055/s-0034-1395384

Cited by 21 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[ 54 ] Validation Study Japan Cranial Surgery Craniotomy Training, Simulation 2016 Lim SH et Al. [ 55 ] Validation Study Korea Macillo-Facial Surgery Mandible reconstruction Planning 2015 Pacione D et al [ 56 ] Pilot Study USA Maxillofacial Surgery Deformity of the skull base and craniovertebral junction Planning 2015 Chan HHL et al [ 57 ] Case Series Canada Maxillofacial Surgery Head and neck surgery Training, Simulation 2015 Dickinson KJ et al [ 58 ] Case Report USA Maxillofacial Surgery Endoscopic resection in esophagus Planning 2015 Hochman JB et al [ 59 ] Comparative Study Canada Maxillofacial Surgery Mastoidectomy and skull base surgery Training 2015 Cohen J et al [ 60 ] Validation Study USA Maxillofacial Surgery Mastoidectomy Training 2015 Lim C et al [ 17 ] Case Series Australia - New Zealand Maxillofacial Surgery Orbital reconstruction Planning 2015 Rose AS et al [ 61 ] Case Report USA ENT Surgery Mastoidectomy Planning, Simulation 2015 Ernoult C. et Al. [ 62 ] Case Series France Maxillofacial Surgery ...…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In dentistry, bone models were more frequently used for simulating dental implant placement [ 30 , 41 , 81 ]. In oral and maxillofacial surgery, the models were more frequently used for planning a bone reconstruction [ 15 – 17 , 36 , 40 , 47 , 50 , 53 , 72 ] or a tumor removal [ 18 , 49 , 56 ]. The models prepared for ENT surgery were mostly used for training surgical temporal access [ 10 , 31 , 52 , 63 – 68 , 85 , 87 ] and mastoidectomy [ 39 , 51 , 59 – 61 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The manipulation of the patient anatomical structures helps to get a better understanding of his specific condition and to plan the required surgical interventions [13]. These models are often used in orthognathic and reconstructive surgeries, giving the possibility of a better comprehension and more predictable results [14][15][16][17]. Measurements and surgical pre-operative evaluations can be performed on these models.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

3D printed bone models in oral and cranio-maxillofacial surgery: a systematic review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim This systematic review aimed to evaluate the use of three-dimensional (3D) printed bone models for training, simulating and/or planning interventions in oral and cranio-maxillofacial surgery. Materials and methods A systematic search was conducted using PubMed® and SCOPUS® databases, up to March 10, 2019, by following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) protocol. Study selection, quality assessment (modified Critical Appraisal Skills Program tool) and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. All original full papers written in English/French/Italian and dealing with the fabrication of 3D printed models of head bone structures, designed from 3D radiological data were included. Multiple parameters and data were investigated, such as author’s purpose, data acquisition systems, printing technologies and materials, accuracy, haptic feedback, variations in treatment time, differences in clinical outcomes, costs, production time and cost-effectiveness. Results Among the 1157 retrieved abstracts, only 69 met the inclusion criteria. 3D printed bone models were mainly used as training or simulation models for tumor removal, or bone reconstruction. Material jetting printers showed best performance but the highest cost. Stereolithographic, laser sintering and binder jetting printers allowed to create accurate models with adequate haptic feedback. The cheap fused deposition modeling printers exhibited satisfactory results for creating training models. Conclusion Patient-specific 3D printed models are known to be useful surgical and educational tools. Faced with the large diversity of software, printing technologies and materials, the clinical team should invest in a 3D printer specifically adapted to the final application.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

3D printed bone models in oral and cranio-maxillofacial surgery: a systematic review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Anatomical models can be used for implant shaping in maxillofacial surgery, a topic that was discussed in nine studies [ 33 – 41 ]. Five papers mentioned time reduction as advantage [ 33 , 36 , 38 – 40 ]. Eight studies concluded that printed models provide good anatomical representations and nine studies mentioned improved surgical outcomes.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Eight studies concluded that printed models provide good anatomical representations and nine studies mentioned improved surgical outcomes. Two studies mentioned exposure to ionizing radiation [ 36 , 41 ] and two mentioned increased costs [ 39 , 41 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

3D-printing techniques in a medical setting: a systematic literature review

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThree-dimensional (3D) printing has numerous applications and has gained much interest in the medical world. The constantly improving quality of 3D-printing applications has contributed to their increased use on patients. This paper summarizes the literature on surgical 3D-printing applications used on patients, with a focus on reported clinical and economic outcomes.MethodsThree major literature databases were screened for case series (more than three cases described in the same study) and trials of surgical applications of 3D printing in humans.Results227 surgical papers were analyzed and summarized using an evidence table. The papers described the use of 3D printing for surgical guides, anatomical models, and custom implants. 3D printing is used in multiple surgical domains, such as orthopedics, maxillofacial surgery, cranial surgery, and spinal surgery. In general, the advantages of 3D-printed parts are said to include reduced surgical time, improved medical outcome, and decreased radiation exposure. The costs of printing and additional scans generally increase the overall cost of the procedure.Conclusion3D printing is well integrated in surgical practice and research. Applications vary from anatomical models mainly intended for surgical planning to surgical guides and implants. Our research suggests that there are several advantages to 3D-printed applications, but that further research is needed to determine whether the increased intervention costs can be balanced with the observable advantages of this new technology. There is a need for a formal cost–effectiveness analysis.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12938-016-0236-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Feasibility and Validity of Printing 3D Heart Models from Rotational Angiography

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rotational angiography (RA) has proven to be an excellent method for evaluating congenital disease (CHD) in the cardiac cath lab, permitting acquisition of 3D datasets with superior spatial resolution. This technique has not been routinely implemented for 3D printing in CHD. We describe our case series of models printed from RA and validate our technique. All patients with models printed from RA were selected. RA acquisitions from a Toshiba Infinix-I system were postprocessed and printed with a Stratasys Eden 260. Two independent observers measured 5-10 points of interest on both the RA and the 3D model. Bland Altman plot was used to compare the measurements on rotational angiography to the printed model. Models were printed from RA in 5 patients (age 2 months-1 year). Diagnoses included (a) coronary artery aneurysm, (b) Glenn shunt, (c) coarctation of the aorta, (d) tetralogy of Fallot with MAPCAs, and (e) pulmonary artery stenosis. There was no significant measurement difference between RA and the printed model (r = 0.990, p < 0.01, Bland Altman p = 0.987). There was also no significant inter-observer variability. The MAPCAs model was referenced by the surgeon intraoperatively and was accurate. Rotational angiography can generate highly accurate 3D models in congenital heart disease, including in small vascular structures. These models can be extremely useful in patient evaluation and management.

show abstract

A Case Series of Rapid Prototyping and Intraoperative Imaging in Orbital Reconstruction

Cited by 21 publications

References 12 publications

3D printed bone models in oral and cranio-maxillofacial surgery: a systematic review

3D printed bone models in oral and cranio-maxillofacial surgery: a systematic review

3D-printing techniques in a medical setting: a systematic literature review

Feasibility and Validity of Printing 3D Heart Models from Rotational Angiography

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About