The Accuracy of 3D Printed Carpal Bones Generated from Cadaveric Specimens | ||
| The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery | ||
| مقاله 13، دوره 9، شماره 4، مهر و آبان 2021، صفحه 432-438 اصل مقاله (680.65 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: RESEARCH PAPER | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22038/abjs.2020.50236.2495 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Cory Lebowitz* 1؛ Joseph Massaglia1؛ Christopher Hoffman2؛ Ludovico Lucenti2؛ Sachin Dheer3؛ Michael Rivlin2؛ Pedro Beredjiklian2 | ||
| 1Rowan University School of Osteopathic Medicine, Stratford, NJ, USA | ||
| 2Department of Hand & Upper Extremity Surgery, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA | ||
| 3Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospitals, Cherry Hill, NJ, USA | ||
| چکیده | ||
| Background: Computer assisted three-dimensional (3D) printing of anatomic models using advanced imaging has wide applications within orthopaedics. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the 3D printing accuracy of carpal bones. Methods: Seven cadaveric wrists underwent CT scanning, after which select carpal bones (scaphoid, capitate, lunate, and trapezium) were dissected in toto. Dimensions including length, circumference, and volume were measured directly from the cadaver bones. The CT images were converted into 3D printable stereolithography (STL) files. The STL files were converted into solid prints using a commercially available 3D printer. The 3D printed models’ dimensions were measured and compared to those of the cadaver bones. A paired t-test was performed to determine if a statistically significant difference existed between the mean measurements of the cadavers and 3D printed models. The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) between the two groups were calculated to measure the degree of agreement. Results: On average, the length and circumference of the 3D printed models were within 2.3 mm and 2.2 mm, respectively, of the cadaveric bones. There was a larger discrepancy in the volume measured, which on average was within 0.65 cc (15.9%) of the cadaveric bones. These differences were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). There was strong agreement between all measurements except the capitate’s length and lunate’s volume. Conclusion: 3D printing can add value to patient care and improve outcomes. This study demonstrates that 3D printing can both accurately and reproducibly fabricate boney models that closely resemble the corresponding cadaveric anatomy. Level of evidence: V | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| Cadaver؛ Carpal bones؛ Computed tomography (CT)؛ Three-dimensional (3D) | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
1. Eltorai AEM, Nguyen E, Daniels AH. Three- Dimensional Printing in Orthopedic Surgery. Orthopedics. 2015;38(11):684-687 2. Liaw CY, Guvendiren M. Current and emerging applications of 3D printing in medicine. Biofabrication. 2017;9(2):024102 3. Galvez M, Asahi T, Baar A, Carcuro G, Cuchacovich N, Fuentes JA, et al. Use of Three-dimensional Printing in Orthopaedic Surgical Planning. J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev. 2018;2(5):e071 4. George E, Liacouras P, Rybicki FJ, Mitsouras D. Measuring and Establishing the Accuracy and Reproducibility of 3D Printed Medical Models. Radiographics. 2017;37(5):1424-1450 5. Ogden KM, Aslan C, Ordway N, Diallo D, Tillapaugh-Fay G, Soman P. Factors Affecting Dimensional Accuracy of 3-D Printed Anatomical Structures Derived from CT Data. J Digit Imaging. 2015;28(6):654-663 6. Wu AM, Shao ZX, Wang JS, Yang XD, Weng WQ, Wang XY, et al. The accuracy of a method for printing three-dimensional spinal models. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(4):e0124291 7. Fishman, EK (1999). Siemens Sensation 16 - CT Protocols - CTisus.com CT Scanning. CTisus. https:// www.ctisus. com/responsive/protocols/siemens?sensation-16 8. Vaish A, Vaish R. 3D printing and its applications in Orthopedics. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2018;9(Suppl 1):S74-S75 9. Zambouri A. Preoperative evaluation and preparation for anesthesia and surgery. Hippokratia. 2007;11(1):13-21. 10. Guo F, Dai J, Zhang J, Ma Y, Zhu G, Shen J, et al. Individualized 3D printing navigation template for pedicle screw fixation in upper cervical spine. PLoS ONE. 2017;12:e0171509. 11. Zheng W, Su J, Cai L, Lou Y, Wang J, Guo X, et al. Application of 3D-printing technology in the treatment of humeral intercondylar fractures. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2018;104:83–8. 12. Huotilainen E, Jaanimets R, Valášek J, Marcian P, Salmi M, Tuomi J, et al. Inaccuracies in additive manufactured medical skull models caused by the DICOM to STL conversion process. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2014;42(5):e259-265 13. Schweizer A, Mauler F, Vlachopoulos L, Nagy L, Fürnstahl P. Computer-Assisted 3-Dimensional Reconstructions of Scaphoid Fractures and Nonunions With and Without the Use of Patient-Specific Guides: Early Clinical Outcomes and Postoperative Assessments of Reconstruction Accuracy. J Hand Surg Am. 2016;41(1):59-69 14. Heinzelmann AD, Archer G, Bindra RR. Anthropometry of the human scaphoid. J Hand Surg Am. 2007;32(7):1005-1008 15. Vaezi T, Hassankhani GG, Ebrahimzadeh MH, Moradi A. Evaluation of Normal Ranges of Wrist Radiologic Indexes in Mashhad Population. Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2017;5(6):451-458. 16. Ballard DH, Mills P, Duszak R, Weisman JA, Rybicki FJ, Woodard PK. Medical 3D Printing Cost-Savings in Orthopedic and Maxillofacial Surgery: Cost Analysis of Operating Room Time Saved with 3D Printed Anatomic Models and Surgical Guides. Academic Radiology. 2020;27:1103–13. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 776 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 464 |
||