| Literature DB >> 32838798 |
Yangming Chen1,2, Jiguang Zhang1,2, Qianshun Chen1,2, Tian Li1,3, Kai Chen1,2, Qinghua Yu1,3, Xing Lin4,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Three-dimensional (3D) computed tomography (CT) reconstruction technology has gained attention owing to its potential in locating ground glass nodules in the lung. The 3D printing technology additionally allows the visualisation of the surrounding anatomical structure and variations. However, the clinical utility of these techniques is unknown. This study aimed to establish a lung tumour and an anatomical lung model using 3D printing and 3D chest CT reconstruction and to evaluate the clinical potential of 3D printing technology in uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic segmentectomy.Entities:
Keywords: 3D printing technique; Ground glass nodule; Position; Thoracoscopic segmentectomy
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32838798 PMCID: PMC7446226 DOI: 10.1186/s12957-020-01998-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: World J Surg Oncol ISSN: 1477-7819 Impact factor: 2.754
Characteristics of the study cohort
| Experimental group A ( | Control group B ( | Total ( | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age [year, average age (± SD)] | 60.73 ± 5.643 | 61.61 ± 6.445 | 61.10 ± 5.979 | -0.685 | 0.495 |
| Gender | |||||
| Male [no. of cases (%)] | 21 (41.2) | 14 (36.8) | 35 (39.3) | 0.171 | 0.679 |
| Female [no. of cases (%)] | 30 (58.8) | 24 (63.2) | 54 (60.7) | ||
| History of smoking | |||||
| Smoker [no. of cases (%)] | 17 (33.3) | 11 (28.9) | 28 (31.5) | 0.194 | 0.659 |
| Non-smoker [no. of cases (%)] | 34 (66.7) | 27 (71.1) | 61 (68.5) | ||
| Position (no. of cases, proportion %) | |||||
| Left lung | 18 (35.3) | 13 (34.2) | 31 (34.8) | 0.011 | 0.915 |
| Right lung | 33 (64.7) | 25 (65.8) | 58 (65.2) | ||
| LS1 + 2 | 3 (5.9) | 2 (5.3) | 5 (5.6) | 0.829 | 1.000 |
| LS1 + 2 + 3 | 3 (5.9) | 3 (7.9) | 6 (6.7) | ||
| LS4 + 5 | 3 (5.9) | 2 (5.3) | 5 (5.6) | ||
| L3 | 2 (3.9) | 1 (2.6) | 3 (3.4) | ||
| L6 | 2 (3.9) | 2 (5.3) | 4 (4.5) | ||
| L basal segment | 5 (9.8) | 3 (7.9) | 8 (9.0) | ||
| RS1 | 6 (11.8) | 4 (10.5) | 10 (11.2) | ||
| RS1 + 2 | 7 (13.7) | 5 (13.2) | 12 (13.5) | ||
| RS3 | 3 (5.9) | 2 (5.3) | 5 (5.6) | ||
| RS6 | 5 (9.8) | 3 (7.9) | 8 (9.0) | ||
| R basal segment | 12 (23.5) | 11 (28.9) | 23 (25.8) | ||
Fig. 1CT image, 3D reconstruction image, and 3D model of the same case. a The patient’s two-dimensional (2D) computed tomography (CT) image showing a part-ground glass nodule (pGGN) in the left upper lung. b–e The patient’s three-dimensional (3D) CT reconstruction image, from which the lung veins, bronchus, and arteries can be more intuitive. f The patient’s 3D print of the lung model not only allows the visualisation of the lung anatomy but also facilitates coordinate positioning, accurately locates the lesion, and helps in the precise wedge resection of the lesion during surgery
Fig. 2The application process of the coordinate positioning method. a, b The horizontal orientations. Using the right upper lung lesion as an example, the CT horizontal section (where the lesion is located) is selected, the right chest contour is regarded as the clock face, and the midline of the clavicle is intended to be the 12 o’clock position. The right midline is intended to be the 9 o’clock position, and the lesion in the “Clock Positioning” legend is at the 7.5 o’clock position. c The vertical axis orientation. Using the right upper lung lesion as an example, the axis of the 7.5 o’clock position on the 3D lung model is selected. The length of the lesion to the tip of the lung is recorded as “a”, and the length of the lesion to the interlobular fissure is recorded as “b”. The proportional position of the lesion on this axis is calculated
Fig. 3Three-dimensional reconstruction CT image of the same patient and intraoperative-related anatomy. a Image of pulmonary artery reconstruction, with arrows pointing to A(1 + 2)a and A(1 + 2)b + c. b The patient’s pulmonary vein, pulmonary artery, bronchi, and pulmonary nodules are shown in the reconstructed image. c The patient’s intraoperative pulmonary anatomy is consistent with preoperative 3D reconstruction and 3D printing
Comparison of the observation indicators between the groups
| Surgery transfer rate (no. of cases (%)) | Operative time (h, | Intraoperative blood loss (mL, | Postoperative complication rate (no. of cases (%)) | Conversion rate (no. of cases (%)) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Experimental Group A ( | 0 (0) | 2.07 ± 0.24 | 43.25 ± 13.63 | 2 (3.9) | 0 (0) |
| Control group B ( | 4 (10.5) | 2.55 ± 0.41 | 96.68 ± 32.82 | 5 (13.2) | 4 (10.5) |
| − 6.366 | − 9.447 | ||||
| P value | 0.030 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.132 | 0.030 |
Comparison of the postoperative complications between the groups
| Persistent lung leak (no., (%)) | Atelectasis (no., (%)) | Pulmonary infection (no., (%)) | Cerebral infarction (no., (%)) | Arrhythmia (no, (%)) | Total (no., (%)) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group A ( | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 1 (2.0) | 1 (2.0) | 0 (0) | 2 (3.9) |
| Group B ( | 1 (2.6) | 0 (0) | 2 (5.3) | 1 (2.6) | 1 (2.6) | 5 (13.2) |
| 0.427 | 1.000 | 0.573 | 1.000 | 0.427 | 0.132 |