Feras Alshomer1, Faisal AlFaqeeh1, Mohammed Alariefy2, Ikhlass Altweijri3, Taghreed Alhumsi4. 1. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Section, Surgery Department, King Khalid University Hospital, King Saud University, Riyadh. 2. University of Jeddah, Jeddah. 3. Neurosurgery Section. 4. Craniofacial Surgery, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Section, Surgery Department, King Khalid University Hospital, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Craniosynostosis is a complex craniofacial deformity. Surgical decision, if needed, is always hard on the parent and requires the use of multimodalities of explanation. To the authors' knowledge, there have been no studies tackling family counseling about the deformity and surgical decision-making process with the use of low-cost patient-specific three-dimensional (3D)-printed models. METHODS: A cross-sectional study investigating the utility of patient-specific 3D-printed models using a desktop-based 3D printer. Questionnaire was constructed and validated screening the demographics, knowledge, expectation, and surgical decision-making process supplied using Likert. Data were collected consecutively from each parent first after explanation with conventional 3D computed tomography (CT) images, and then repeated after the 3D-printed model has been presented. RESULTS: Fourteen parents were screened. Majority of parents considered the pathology to have a potential effect of child's functional and aesthetic outcomes. After using the 3D-printed models, the participants had a clear vision and needed not to read any more about the condition (P = 0.05, P = 0.019, respectively). Agreement for surgical management was in favor of the 3D-printed models compared with CT images (P = 0.028). Explanation with CT images yielded higher mean score in knowledge about potential complications compared with 3D models (P value = 0.007). For the 3D models, average printing time was 26 hours, and a mean cost of 5.2$. CONCLUSION: The utility of desktop 3D printing is an affordable modality to provide adequate information about craniosynostosis and can assist surgical decision-making. Knowledge and adaptation of such cheap technology represents a great skill aiding clinical practice.
BACKGROUND:Craniosynostosis is a complex craniofacial deformity. Surgical decision, if needed, is always hard on the parent and requires the use of multimodalities of explanation. To the authors' knowledge, there have been no studies tackling family counseling about the deformity and surgical decision-making process with the use of low-cost patient-specific three-dimensional (3D)-printed models. METHODS: A cross-sectional study investigating the utility of patient-specific 3D-printed models using a desktop-based 3D printer. Questionnaire was constructed and validated screening the demographics, knowledge, expectation, and surgical decision-making process supplied using Likert. Data were collected consecutively from each parent first after explanation with conventional 3D computed tomography (CT) images, and then repeated after the 3D-printed model has been presented. RESULTS: Fourteen parents were screened. Majority of parents considered the pathology to have a potential effect of child's functional and aesthetic outcomes. After using the 3D-printed models, the participants had a clear vision and needed not to read any more about the condition (P = 0.05, P = 0.019, respectively). Agreement for surgical management was in favor of the 3D-printed models compared with CT images (P = 0.028). Explanation with CT images yielded higher mean score in knowledge about potential complications compared with 3D models (P value = 0.007). For the 3D models, average printing time was 26 hours, and a mean cost of 5.2$. CONCLUSION: The utility of desktop 3D printing is an affordable modality to provide adequate information about craniosynostosis and can assist surgical decision-making. Knowledge and adaptation of such cheap technology represents a great skill aiding clinical practice.
Authors: Sauson Soldozy; Kaan Yağmurlu; Daniel K Akyeampong; Rebecca Burke; Peter F Morgenstern; Robert F Keating; Jonathan S Black; John A Jane; Hasan R Syed Journal: Childs Nerv Syst Date: 2021-03-29 Impact factor: 1.475
Authors: Malak Alghamdi; Taghreed R Alhumsi; Ikhlass Altweijri; Waleed H Alkhamis; Omar Barasain; Kelly J Cardona-Londoño; Reshmi Ramakrishnan; Francisco J Guzmán-Vega; Stefan T Arold; Ghaida Ali; Nouran Adly; Hebatallah Ali; Ahmed Basudan; Muhammed A Bakhrebah Journal: Front Pediatr Date: 2021-04-16 Impact factor: 3.418
Authors: Wojciech Czyżewski; Jakub Jachimczyk; Zofia Hoffman; Michał Szymoniuk; Jakub Litak; Marcin Maciejewski; Krzysztof Kura; Radosław Rola; Kamil Torres Journal: Materials (Basel) Date: 2022-07-06 Impact factor: 3.748