Auricular reconstruction via 3D bioprinting strategies: An update

Dwivedi, Ruby; Yadav, Pradeep Kumar; Pandey, Rahul; Mehrotra, Divya

doi:10.1016/j.jobcr.2022.07.014

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 96 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…PCL is deemed to be a suitable material for engineering biomimetic scaffold with its micro-architecture and physicochemical properties. Most of current studies on the role of 3D printing in ear reconstruction are still in the experimental stage, 12 and some clinical studies are also limited to be case reports of fabricating 3D printed molds for implants; 13 14 therefore, structured, reliable clinical series are still scarce.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

One-Year Results of Ear Reconstruction with 3D Printed Implants

Kim,

Kim

et al. 2024

Yonsei Med J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose External ear reconstruction has been a challenging subject for plastic surgeons for decades. Popular methods using autologous costal cartilage or polyethylene still have their drawbacks. With the advance of three-dimensional (3D) printing technique, bioscaffold engineering using synthetic polymer draws attention as an alternative. This is a clinical trial of ear reconstruction using 3D printed scaffold, presented with clinical results after 1 year. Materials and Methods From 2021 to 2022, five adult patients with unilateral microtia underwent two-staged total ear reconstruction using 3D printed implants. For each patient, a patient-specific 3D printed scaffold was designed and produced with polycaprolactone (PCL) based on computed tomography images, using fused deposition modeling. Computed tomography scan was obtained preoperatively, within 2 weeks following the surgery and after 1 year, to compare the volume of the normal side and the reconstructed ear. At 1-year visit, clinical photo was taken for scoring by two surgeons and patients themselves. Results All five patients had completely healed reconstructed ear at 1-year follow-up. On average, the volume of reconstructed ear was 161.54% of that of the normal side ear. In a range of 0 to 10, objective assessors gave scores 3 to 6, whereas patients gave scores 8 to 10. Conclusion External ear reconstruction using 3D printed PCL implant showed durable, safe results reflected by excellent volume restoration and patient satisfaction at 1 year postoperatively. Further clinical follow-up with more cases and refinement of scaffold with advancing bioprinting technique is anticipated. The study’s plan and results have been registered with the Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS No. 3-2019-0306) and the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS No. 1182).

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%