Literature DB >> 33616839

Patient-specific desktop 3D-printed guides for pelvic tumour resection surgery: a precision study on cadavers.

Mónica García-Sevilla1,2, Lydia Mediavilla-Santos2,3, María Teresa Ruiz-Alba1,2, Rubén Pérez-Mañanes2,3, José Antonio Calvo-Haro2,3, Javier Pascau4,5.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: 3D-printed patient-specific instruments have become a useful tool to improve accuracy in pelvic tumour resections. However, their correct placement can be challenging in some regions due to the morphology of the bone, so it is essential to be aware of the possible placement errors in each region. In this study, we characterize these errors in common pelvic osteotomies.
METHODS: We conducted an experiment with 9 cadaveric specimens, for which we acquired a pre-operative computed tomography scan. Small PSIs were designed for each case following a realistic surgical approach for four regions of the pelvis: iliac crest (C), supra-acetabular (S), ischial (I), and pubic (P). Final surgical placement was based on a post-operative scan. The resulting positions were compared with pre-operative planning, obtaining translations, rotations, and maximum osteotomy deviations in a local reference frame defined based on the bone's morphology.
RESULTS: Mean translations and rotations in the direction of the osteotomy plane were as follows: C = 5.3 mm, 6.7°; S = 1.8 mm, 5.1°; I = 1.5 mm, 3.4°; P = 1.8 mm, 3.5°. Mean translations in the remaining axes were below 2 mm. Maximum osteotomy deviations (75% of cases) were below 11.8 mm in C (7.8 mm for half-length), 7.8 mm in S (5.5 mm for half-length), 5.5 mm in I, and 3.7 mm in P.
CONCLUSION: We have characterized placement errors for small PSIs in four regions of the pelvis. Our results show high errors in C and S PSIs in the direction of the resection plane's normal, and thus large osteotomy deviations. Deviations in short osteotomies in S, I and P and placement errors in the remaining directions were low. The PSIs used in this study are biocompatible and can be produced with a desktop 3D printer, thus minimizing manufacturing cost.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cadaveric study; Desktop 3D printing; Patient-specific instruments; Pelvic tumour

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33616839     DOI: 10.1007/s11548-021-02322-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg        ISSN: 1861-6410            Impact factor:   2.924


  11 in total

Review 1.  Image-guided interventions: technology review and clinical applications.

Authors:  Kevin Cleary; Terry M Peters
Journal:  Annu Rev Biomed Eng       Date:  2010-08-15       Impact factor: 9.590

2.  3D Slicer as an image computing platform for the Quantitative Imaging Network.

Authors:  Andriy Fedorov; Reinhard Beichel; Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer; Julien Finet; Jean-Christophe Fillion-Robin; Sonia Pujol; Christian Bauer; Dominique Jennings; Fiona Fennessy; Milan Sonka; John Buatti; Stephen Aylward; James V Miller; Steve Pieper; Ron Kikinis
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2012-07-06       Impact factor: 2.546

Review 3.  Current and emerging applications of 3D printing in medicine.

Authors:  Chya-Yan Liaw; Murat Guvendiren
Journal:  Biofabrication       Date:  2017-06-07       Impact factor: 9.954

4.  Facilitating surgeon understanding of complex anatomy using a three-dimensional printed model.

Authors:  Barrett P Cromeens; William C Ray; Brad Hoehne; Fikir Abayneh; Brent Adler; Gail E Besner
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2017-04-21       Impact factor: 2.192

5.  Patient-specific instrument can achieve same accuracy with less resection time than navigation assistance in periacetabular pelvic tumor surgery: a cadaveric study.

Authors:  Kwok-Chuen Wong; Kwan-Yik Sze; Irene Oi-Ling Wong; Chung-Ming Wong; Shekhar-Madhukar Kumta
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2015-07-07       Impact factor: 2.924

6.  New method of evaluating the surgical margin and safety margin for musculoskeletal sarcoma, analysed on the basis of 457 surgical cases.

Authors:  N Kawaguchi; S Matumoto; J Manabe
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 4.553

Review 7.  Utilization of desktop 3D printer-fabricated "Cost-Effective" 3D models in orthognathic surgery.

Authors:  Masato Narita; Takashi Takaki; Takahiko Shibahara; Masashi Iwamoto; Takashi Yakushiji; Takashi Kamio
Journal:  Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2020-08-01

8.  Surgical inaccuracy of tumor resection and reconstruction within the pelvis: an experimental study.

Authors:  Olivier Cartiaux; Pierre-Louis Docquier; Laurent Paul; Bernard G Francq; Olivier H Cornu; Christian Delloye; Benoit Raucent; Bruno Dehez; Xavier Banse
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 3.717

9.  Computer-Assisted Planning and Patient-Specific Instruments for Bone Tumor Resection within the Pelvis: A Series of 11 Patients.

Authors:  François Gouin; Laurent Paul; Guillaume Anthony Odri; Olivier Cartiaux
Journal:  Sarcoma       Date:  2014-07-02

10.  The accuracy of a 3D printing surgical guide determined by CBCT and model analysis.

Authors:  Boyoung Ma; Taeseok Park; Inkon Chun; Kwidug Yun
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2018-08-17       Impact factor: 1.904

View more
  2 in total

1.  Augmented Reality as a Tool to Guide PSI Placement in Pelvic Tumor Resections.

Authors:  Mónica García-Sevilla; Rafael Moreta-Martinez; David García-Mato; Alicia Pose-Diez-de-la-Lastra; Rubén Pérez-Mañanes; José Antonio Calvo-Haro; Javier Pascau
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2021-11-24       Impact factor: 3.576

2.  Digital chain for pelvic tumor resection with 3D-printed surgical cutting guides.

Authors:  Vincent Biscaccianti; Henri Fragnaud; Jean-Yves Hascoët; Vincent Crenn; Luciano Vidal
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2022-09-08
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.