Cranioplasty with a low-cost customized polymethylmethacrylate implant using a desktop 3D printer

Abstract

OBJECTIVE Cranioplasty implants should be widely available, low in cost, and customized or easy to mold during surgery. Although autologous bone remains the first choice for repair, it cannot always be used due to infection, fragmentation, bone resorption, or other causes, which led to use of synthetic alternatives. The most frequently used allogenic material for cranial reconstructions with long-term results is polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA). Three-dimensional printing technology has allowed the production of increasingly popular customized, prefabricated implants. The authors describe their method and experience with a customized PMMA prosthesis using a precise and reliable low-cost implant that can be customized at any institution with open-source or low-cost software and desktop 3D printers. METHODS A review of 22 consecutive patients undergoing CT-based, low-cost, customized PMMA cranioplasty over a 1-year period at a university teaching hospital was performed. Preoperative data included patient sex and age; CT modeling parameters, including the surface area of the implant (defect); reason for craniectomy; date(s) of injury and/or resections; the complexity of the defect; and associated comorbidities. Postoperative data included morbiditiy and complications, such as implant exposure, infection, hematoma, seroma, implant failure, and seizures; the cost of the implant; and cosmetic outcome. RESULTS Indications for the primary craniectomy were traumatic brain injury (16, 73%), tumor resection (3, 14%), infection (1, 4%), and vascular (2, 9%). The median interval between previous surgery and PMMA cranioplasty was 12 months. The operation time ranged from 90 to 150 minutes (mean 126 minutes). The average cranial defect measured 65.16 cm (range 29.31-131.06 cm). During the recovery period, there was no sign of infection, implant rejection, or wound dehiscence, and none of the implants had to be removed over a follow-up ranging from 1 to 6 months. The aesthetic appearance of all patients was significantly improved, and the implant fit was excellent. CONCLUSIONS The use of a customized PMMA was associated with excellent patient, family, and surgeon satisfaction at follow-up at a fraction of the cost associated with commercially available implants. This technique could be an attractive option to all patients undergoing cranioplasty.

Cranioplasty with three-dimensional customised mould for polymethylmethacrylate implant: a series of 11 consecutive patients with cost-effectiveness consideration

“…Interdisciplinary collaboration between engineering and neurosurgery is an evident starting point. This concept, as previously described [13,32,19,2,17], favoured the creation of the mould. The use of 3D images facilitated the integration between medical staff and engineering.…”

A small 3D-printing model of macroadenomas for endoscopic endonasal surgery

“…Previously, many papers about the use of 3D printing in medicine mentioned that 3D-printed models are time and money consuming [ 27 , 28 ], which impedes the application and promotion of 3D printing in medicine. In order to solve this problem, we limited the printed model to reflect the surrounding anatomical structures of the tumor.…”

Modern materials for the reconstruction of the cranial vault bones

“…Значительную роль в работе современных хирургов играют методы стереолитографии -изготовления протезов по точной трехмерной модели существующего дефекта. Относительно долгое время существует практика точного моделирования титановых протезов, а распространение 3D-принтеров упростило стереолитографию пластин из полимерных материалов [52].…”