Medical 3D printing: methods to standardize terminology and report trends

Abstract

BackgroundMedical 3D printing is expanding exponentially, with tremendous potential yet to be realized in nearly all facets of medicine. Unfortunately, multiple informal subdomain-specific isolated terminological ‘silos’ where disparate terminology is used for similar concepts are also arising as rapidly. It is imperative to formalize the foundational terminology at this early stage to facilitate future knowledge integration, collaborative research, and appropriate reimbursement. The purpose of this work is to develop objective, literature-based consensus-building methodology for the medical 3D printing domain to support expert consensus.ResultsWe first quantitatively survey the temporal, conceptual, and geographic diversity of all existing published applications within medical 3D printing literature and establish the existence of self-isolating research clusters. We then demonstrate an automated objective methodology to aid in establishing a terminological consensus for the field based on objective analysis of the existing literature. The resultant analysis provides a rich overview of the 3D printing literature, including publication statistics and trends globally, chronologically, technologically, and within each major medical discipline. The proposed methodology is used to objectively establish the dominance of the term “3D printing” to represent a collection of technologies that produce physical models in the medical setting. We demonstrate that specific domains do not use this term in line with objective consensus and call for its universal adoption.ConclusionOur methodology can be applied to the entirety of medical 3D printing literature to obtain a complete, validated, and objective set of recommended and synonymous definitions to aid expert bodies in building ontological consensus.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s41205-017-0012-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Intracranial vasculature 3D printing: review of techniques and manufacturing processes to inform clinical practice

“…Following acquisition the DICOM datasets must be transferred to the 3D printing software from the clinical machine. For 3D printing to become an efficient clinical service, an institutional process for transferring the data from the scanners must be created and linked to an order within the electronic medical record [1]. One solution is to create a terminal that each scanner may send 3D printing data to or may be used to pull the data from the clinical storage system.…”

Modelling of an Additive 3D-Printing Process Based on Design of Experiments Methodology

“…The first of the AM applications in the medical sector was the use of computerised tomography to create images of subjects from any angle. In addition, AM has been applied in different categories of medical applications, such as for surgical and diagnostic aids, prosthesis development, and manufacturing related to medicine and tissue engineering (Chepelev et al, 2017;Tofail et al, 2018).…”

Clinical Applications of 3D Printing

“…For 3D printing to become a reimbursable service provided by radiologists, it is prudent to develop a standardized lexicon on naming models, the process of printing itself, and other related factors. Chepelev et al (118) conducted a literature search in order to standardize terminology related to 3D printing. They concluded that "3D printing", "additive manufacturing", and "rapid prototyping" are three nearly synonymous terms used to describe the concept of 3D printing.…”

“…They concluded that "3D printing", "additive manufacturing", and "rapid prototyping" are three nearly synonymous terms used to describe the concept of 3D printing. They found that by 2015, "3D printing" was the most frequent descriptor (>60%) and they advocate its use over the other two terms (118). …”