Modern imaging techniques are an essential component of preoperative planning in plastic and reconstructive surgery. However, conventional modalities, including three-dimensional (3D) reconstructions, are limited by their representation on 2D workstations. 3D printing, also known as rapid prototyping or additive manufacturing, was once the province of industry to fabricate models from a computer-aided design (CAD) in a layer-by-layer manner. The early adopters in clinical practice have embraced the medical imaging-guided 3D-printed biomodels for their ability to provide tactile feedback and a superior appreciation of visuospatial relationship between anatomical structures. With increasing accessibility, investigators are able to convert standard imaging data into a CAD file using various 3D reconstruction softwares and ultimately fabricate 3D models using 3D printing techniques, such as stereolithography, multijet modeling, selective laser sintering, binder jet technique, and fused deposition modeling. However, many clinicians have questioned whether the cost-to-benefit ratio justifies its ongoing use. The cost and size of 3D printers have rapidly decreased over the past decade in parallel with the expiration of key 3D printing patents. Significant improvements in clinical imaging and user-friendly 3D software have permitted computer-aided 3D modeling of anatomical structures and implants without outsourcing in many cases. These developments offer immense potential for the application of 3D printing at the bedside for a variety of clinical applications. In this review, existing uses of 3D printing in plastic surgery practice spanning the spectrum from templates for facial transplantation surgery through to the formation of bespoke craniofacial implants to optimize post-operative esthetics are described. Furthermore, we discuss the potential of 3D printing to become an essential office-based tool in plastic surgery to assist in preoperative planning, developing intraoperative guidance tools, teaching patients and surgical trainees, and producing patient-specific prosthetics in everyday surgical practice.

BackgroundMalignant ameloblastoma, comprising metastasizing ameloblastoma and ameloblastic carcinoma, represents 1.6–2.2% of all odontogenic tumors. Due to its rare nature, malignant ameloblastoma has only been reported in the literature in small case series or case reports. Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End-Results (SEER) database, we have performed a population-based study to determine the incidence rate and the absolute survival of malignant ameloblastoma.MethodUsing the International Classification of Diseases for Oncology (ICD-O) codes 9310/3 and 9270/3, data from the SEER database were used to calculate the incidence rate and absolute survival rate of population with malignant ameloblastoma.ResultsThe overall incidence rate of malignant ameloblastoma was 1.79 per 10 million person/year. The incidence rate was higher in males than females and also higher in black versus white population. The median overall survival was 17.6 years from the time of diagnosis and increasing age was associated with a statistically significant poorer survival.ConclusionsTo our best knowledge, we report the largest population-based series of malignant ameloblastoma. The incidence rate was 1.79 per 10 million person/year and the overall survival was 17.6 years.