Printed Three-dimensional Anatomic Templates for Virtual Preoperative Planning Before Reconstruction of Old Pelvic Injuries

Abstract

Background:Old pelvis fractures are among the most challenging fractures to treat because of their complex anatomy, difficult-to-access surgical sites, and the relatively low incidence of such cases. Proper evaluation and surgical planning are necessary to achieve the pelvic ring symmetry and stable fixation of the fracture. The goal of this study was to assess the use of three-dimensional (3D) printing techniques for surgical management of old pelvic fractures.Methods:First, 16 dried human cadaveric pelvises were used to confirm the anatomical accuracy of the 3D models printed based on radiographic data. Next, nine clinical cases between January 2009 and April 2013 were used to evaluate the surgical reconstruction based on the 3D printed models. The pelvic injuries were all type C, and the average time from injury to reconstruction was 11 weeks (range: 8–17 weeks). The workflow consisted of: (1) Printing patient-specific bone models based on preoperative computed tomography (CT) scans, (2) virtual fracture reduction using the printed 3D anatomic template, (3) virtual fracture fixation using Kirschner wires, and (4) preoperatively measuring the osteotomy and implant position relative to landmarks using the virtually defined deformation. These models aided communication between surgical team members during the procedure. This technique was validated by comparing the preoperative planning to the intraoperative procedure.Results:The accuracy of the 3D printed models was within specification. Production of a model from standard CT DICOM data took 7 hours (range: 6–9 hours). Preoperative planning using the 3D printed models was feasible in all cases. Good correlation was found between the preoperative planning and postoperative follow-up X-ray in all nine cases. The patients were followed for 3–29 months (median: 5 months). The fracture healing time was 9–17 weeks (mean: 10 weeks). No delayed incision healing, wound infection, or nonunions occurred. The results were excellent in two cases, good in five, and poor in two based on the Majeed score.Conclusions:The 3D printing planning technique for pelvic surgery was successfully integrated into a clinical workflow to improve patient-specific preoperative planning by providing a visual and haptic model of the injury and allowing patient-specific adaptation of each osteosynthesis implant to the virtually reduced pelvis.

Three-Dimensional Printing of Carbamazepine Sustained-Release Scaffold

“…It uses an additive or layer-by-layer-based approach to create a complex 3D geometry for a variety of applications. 19,20 Its ability to customize and fabricate complex structures [21][22][23][24][25] has prompted its use in many health care applications, such as for bone and cartilage replacements, customized dental implants, antimicrobial drug-eluting implants, hearing aids, and surgical guides, among others. 3DP also offers the advantages of speed, low cost, availability of a wide range of printing materials, accuracy, and reproducibility.…”

Application of 3D technology and printing for femoral derotation osteotomy: case and technical report

“…This case exemplifies that the use of 3D technology and printing (8)(9)(10), from diagnosis to treatment, can help to achieve successful results in a rapid and economical manner, reducing intervention times and minimizing risks to the patient.…”

Three‐dimensional printing of X‐ray computed tomography datasets with multiple materials using open‐source data processing

“…Realistic replicas of anatomical specimens may be used to represent details as fine as small nerves and blood vessels (McMenamin et al, ). For biomedical researchers and trainees, these printed anatomical replicas may be a helpful utility in each of the following areas: device development (Wu et al, ; Lee et al, ; Giannatsis and Dedoussis, ; Kurenov et al, ), surgical planning (D'Urso et al, ; Giannatsis and Dedoussis, ; Esses et al, ; Kurenov et al, ; Wu et al, ), medical training (Waran et al, ; Adams et al, ), diagnosis and evaluation (Esses et al, ; Wu et al, ), patient communication (Bernhard et al, ), implantation and scaffold tissue engineering, (D'Urso et al, 2000; Leukers et al, ; Boland et al, ; Khalyfa et al, ; Giannatsis and Dedoussis, ; Bergmann et al, ; Esses et al, ) and last but not least, various uses for educational purposes (Torres et al, ; Adams et al, ).…”