Literature DB >> 31663044

Development and first clinical use of a novel anatomical and biomechanical testing platform for scoliosis.

Michael A Bohl1, Sarah McBryan1, Peter Nakaji1, Steve W Chang1, Jay D Turner1, U Kumar Kakarla1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated that, by using various three-dimensional (3D) printing technologies, synthetic spine models can be manufactured to mimic a human spine in its gross and radiographic anatomy and the biomechanical performance of bony and ligamentous tissue. These manufacturing processes have not, however, been used in combination to create a long-segment, biomimetic model of a patient with scoliosis. The purpose of this study was to describe the development of a biomimetic scoliosis model and early clinical experience using this model as a surgical planning and education platform.
METHODS: Synthetic spine models were printed to mimic the anatomy and biomechanical performance of 2 adult patients with scoliosis. Preoperatively, the models were surgically corrected by the attending surgeon of each patient. Patients then underwent surgical correction of their spinal deformities. Correction of the models was compared to the surgical correction in the patients.
RESULTS: Patient 1 had a preoperative coronal Cobb angle of 40° from L1 to S1, as did the patient's synthetic spine model. The patient's spine model was corrected to 17.6°, and the patient achieved a correction of 17.3°. Patient 2 had a preoperative mid-thoracic Cobb angle of 88° and an upper thoracic Cobb angle of 43°. Preoperatively, the patient's spine model was corrected to 19.5° and 9.2° for the mid-thoracic and upper thoracic curves, respectively. Immediately after surgery, the patient's mid-thoracic and upper thoracic Cobb angles measured 18.7° and 9.5°, respectively. In both cases, the use of the spine models preoperatively changed the attending surgeon's operative plan.
CONCLUSIONS: A novel synthetic spine model for corrective scoliosis procedures is presented, along with early clinical experience using this model as a surgical planning platform. This model has tremendous potential not only as a surgical planning platform but also as an adjunct to patient consent, surgical education, and biomechanical research. 2019 Journal of Spine Surgery. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Three-dimensional printing (3D); adult spinal deformity; idiopathic scoliosis; surgical education

Year:  2019        PMID: 31663044      PMCID: PMC6787359          DOI: 10.21037/jss.2019.09.04

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Spine Surg        ISSN: 2414-4630


  26 in total

1.  3D-printed pediatric endoscopic ear surgery simulator for surgical training.

Authors:  Samuel R Barber; Elliott D Kozin; Matthew Dedmon; Brian M Lin; Kyuwon Lee; Sumi Sinha; Nicole Black; Aaron K Remenschneider; Daniel J Lee
Journal:  Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-08-31       Impact factor: 1.675

2.  The Barrow Biomimetic Spine: Fluoroscopic Analysis of a Synthetic Spine Model Made of Variable 3D-printed Materials and Print Parameters.

Authors:  Michael A Bohl; Michael A Mooney; Garrett J Repp; Peter Nakaji; Steve W Chang; Jay D Turner; U Kumar Kakarla
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2018-12-01       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  "Just-In-Time" Simulation Training Using 3-D Printed Cardiac Models After Congenital Cardiac Surgery.

Authors:  Laura J Olivieri; Lillian Su; Conor F Hynes; Axel Krieger; Fahad A Alfares; Karthik Ramakrishnan; David Zurakowski; M Blair Marshall; Peter C W Kim; Richard A Jonas; Dilip S Nath
Journal:  World J Pediatr Congenit Heart Surg       Date:  2016-03

4.  Cerebral Aneurysm Clipping Surgery Simulation Using Patient-Specific 3D Printing and Silicone Casting.

Authors:  Justin R Ryan; Kaith K Almefty; Peter Nakaji; David H Frakes
Journal:  World Neurosurg       Date:  2016-01-22       Impact factor: 2.104

5.  The current testing protocols for biomechanical evaluation of lumbar spinal implants in laboratory setting: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Sabrina A Gonzalez-Blohm; James J Doulgeris; William E Lee; Thomas M Shea; Kamran Aghayev; Frank D Vrionis
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2015-02-15       Impact factor: 3.411

6.  Use of a life-size three-dimensional-printed spine model for pedicle screw instrumentation training.

Authors:  Hyun Jin Park; Chenyu Wang; Kyung Ho Choi; Hyong Nyun Kim
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2018-04-16       Impact factor: 2.359

7.  The Barrow Biomimetic Spine: Comparative Testing of a 3D-Printed L4-L5 Schwab Grade 2 Osteotomy Model to a Cadaveric Model.

Authors:  Michael A Bohl; Michael A Mooney; Garrett J Repp; Claudio Cavallo; Peter Nakaji; Steve W Chang; Jay D Turner; U Kumar Kakarla
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2018-04-17

8.  The Barrow Biomimetic Spine: Face, Content, and Construct Validity of a 3D-Printed Spine Model for Freehand and Minimally Invasive Pedicle Screw Insertion.

Authors:  Michael A Bohl; Rohit Mauria; James J Zhou; Michael A Mooney; Joseph D DiDomenico; Sarah McBryan; Claudio Cavallo; Peter Nakaji; Steve W Chang; Juan S Uribe; Jay D Turner; U Kumar Kakarla
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2019-02-05

9.  The accuracy of a method for printing three-dimensional spinal models.

Authors:  Ai-Min Wu; Zhen-Xuan Shao; Jian-Shun Wang; Xin-Dong Yang; Wan-Qing Weng; Xiang-Yang Wang; Hua-Zi Xu; Yong-Long Chi; Zhong-Ke Lin
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-04-27       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Cadaveric Spinal Surgery Simulation: A Comparison of Cadaver Types.

Authors:  James E Tomlinson; Marina Yiasemidou; Anna L Watts; Dave J H Roberts; Jake Timothy
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2015-09-29
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.