A M J Frölich1, J Spallek2, L Brehmer3, J-H Buhk3, D Krause2, J Fiehler3, A Kemmling3. 1. From the Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology (A.M.J.F., L.B., J.-H.B., J.F., A.K.), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany a.froelich@gmail.com. 2. Technical University Hamburg-Harburg (D.K., J.S.), Institute of Product Development and Mechanical Engineering Design, Hamburg, Germany. 3. From the Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology (A.M.J.F., L.B., J.-H.B., J.F., A.K.), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: As part of a multicenter cooperation (Aneurysm-Like Synthetic bodies for Testing Endovascular devices in 3D Reality) with focus on implementation of additive manufacturing in neuroradiologic practice, we systematically assessed the technical feasibility and accuracy of several additive manufacturing techniques. We evaluated the method of fused deposition modeling for the production of aneurysm models replicating patient-specific anatomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 3D rotational angiographic data from 10 aneurysms were processed to obtain volumetric models suitable for fused deposition modeling. A hollow aneurysm model with connectors for silicone tubes was fabricated by using acrylonitrile butadiene styrene. Support material was dissolved, and surfaces were finished by using NanoSeal. The resulting models were filled with iodinated contrast media. 3D rotational angiography of the models was acquired, and aneurysm geometry was compared with the original patient data. RESULTS: Reproduction of hollow aneurysm models was technically feasible in 8 of 10 cases, with aneurysm sizes ranging from 41 to 2928 mm(3) (aneurysm diameter, 3-19 mm). A high level of anatomic accuracy was observed, with a mean Dice index of 93.6% ± 2.4%. Obstructions were encountered in vessel segments of <1 mm. CONCLUSIONS: Fused deposition modeling is a promising technique, which allows rapid and precise replication of cerebral aneurysms. The porosity of the models can be overcome by surface finishing. Models produced with fused deposition modeling may serve as educational and research tools and could be used to individualize treatment planning.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: As part of a multicenter cooperation (Aneurysm-Like Synthetic bodies for Testing Endovascular devices in 3D Reality) with focus on implementation of additive manufacturing in neuroradiologic practice, we systematically assessed the technical feasibility and accuracy of several additive manufacturing techniques. We evaluated the method of fused deposition modeling for the production of aneurysm models replicating patient-specific anatomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 3D rotational angiographic data from 10 aneurysms were processed to obtain volumetric models suitable for fused deposition modeling. A hollow aneurysm model with connectors for silicone tubes was fabricated by using acrylonitrile butadiene styrene. Support material was dissolved, and surfaces were finished by using NanoSeal. The resulting models were filled with iodinated contrast media. 3D rotational angiography of the models was acquired, and aneurysm geometry was compared with the original patient data. RESULTS: Reproduction of hollow aneurysm models was technically feasible in 8 of 10 cases, with aneurysm sizes ranging from 41 to 2928 mm(3) (aneurysm diameter, 3-19 mm). A high level of anatomic accuracy was observed, with a mean Dice index of 93.6% ± 2.4%. Obstructions were encountered in vessel segments of <1 mm. CONCLUSIONS: Fused deposition modeling is a promising technique, which allows rapid and precise replication of cerebral aneurysms. The porosity of the models can be overcome by surface finishing. Models produced with fused deposition modeling may serve as educational and research tools and could be used to individualize treatment planning.
Authors: Kamran Ahmed; Aoife N Keeling; Morkos Fakhry; Hutan Ashrafian; Rajesh Aggarwal; Peter A Naughton; Ara Darzi; Nicholas Cheshire; Thanos Athanasiou; Mohammed Hamady Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: C Papagiannaki; L Spelle; A-C Januel; A Benaissa; J-Y Gauvrit; V Costalat; H Desal; F Turjman; S Velasco; X Barreau; P Courtheoux; C Cognard; D Herbreteau; J Moret; L Pierot Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2014-07-03 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Stephan G Wetzel; Makoto Ohta; Akira Handa; Jean-Marc Auer; Pedro Lylyk; Karl-Olof Lovblad; Drazenko Babic; D A Rufenacht Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2005 Jun-Jul Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Jonathan B Lamano; Grace G Bushnell; Hongyu Chen; Avanti Badrinathan; Najib E El Tecle; Bernard R Bendok; Matthew R Glucksberg Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2014-12 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Elizabeth George; Maria Barile; Anji Tang; Ory Wiesel; Antonio Coppolino; Andreas Giannopoulos; Steven Mentzer; Michael Jaklitsch; Andetta Hunsaker; Dimitrios Mitsouras Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 2017-09 Impact factor: 3.454
Authors: Andreas A Giannopoulos; Dimitris Mitsouras; Shi-Joon Yoo; Peter P Liu; Yiannis S Chatzizisis; Frank J Rybicki Journal: Nat Rev Cardiol Date: 2016-10-27 Impact factor: 32.419
Authors: Petrice M Cogswell; Matthew A Rischall; Amy E Alexander; Hunter J Dickens; Giuseppe Lanzino; Jonathan M Morris Journal: 3D Print Med Date: 2020-08-06
Authors: Jan Sedlacik; Andreas Frölich; Johanna Spallek; Nils D Forkert; Tobias D Faizy; Franziska Werner; Tobias Knopp; Dieter Krause; Jens Fiehler; Jan-Hendrik Buhk Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-08-05 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Marie Teresa Nawka; Uta Hanning; Helena Guerreiro; Fabian Flottmann; Noel Van Horn; Jan-Hendrik Buhk; Jens Fiehler; Andreas Maximilian Frölich Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-09-17 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Gunpreet Oberoi; M C Eberspächer-Schweda; Sepideh Hatamikia; Markus Königshofer; Doris Baumgartner; Anne-Margarethe Kramer; Peter Schaffarich; Hermann Agis; Francesco Moscato; Ewald Unger Journal: Front Vet Sci Date: 2020-11-27