scholarly journals Imaging and printing in plastic and reconstructive surgery part 2: emerging techniques

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-77
Author(s):  
Michael P Chae ◽  
David J Hunter-Smith ◽  
Warren M Rozen
Keyword(s):  
Reconstructive Surgery ◽  
English Literature ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Tactile Feedback ◽  
Navigation Systems ◽  
Plastic And Reconstructive Surgery ◽  
Image Guided ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Added Benefit

Background: In the second of a two-part series, we evaluate emerging three-dimensional (3D) imaging and printing techniques based on computed tomography angiography (CT) and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) for use in plastic and reconstructive surgery. Method: A review of the published English literature dating from 1950 to 2017 was taken using databases such as PubMed, MEDLINE®, Web of Science and EMBASE. Results: Image-guided navigation systems using fiducial markers have demonstrated utility in numerous surgical disciplines, including perforator-based flap surgery. However, these systems have largely been superseded by augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) technologies with superior convenience and speed. With the added benefit of tactile feedback, holograms also appear promising but have yet to be developed beyond the prototypic stage. Aided by a growing volume of digitalised clinical data, machine learning (ML) poses significant benefits for future image-based decision-making processes. Conclusion: Most studies of image-guided navigation systems, AR, VR, holograms and ML have been presented in small case series and they remain to be analysed using outcomes-based validation studies. However, together they illustrate an exciting future where clinicians will be armed with intuitive technologies for surgical planning and guidance.

scholarly journals Three-Dimensional Printing: Custom-Made Implants for Craniomaxillofacial Reconstructive Surgery

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 089-098 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariana Matias ◽  
Horácio Zenha ◽  
Horácio Costa
Keyword(s):  
3D Printing ◽  
Reconstructive Surgery ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Tactile Feedback ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Printing Technology ◽  
Three Dimensional Printing ◽  
3D Printing Technology ◽  
Custom Made ◽  
The Aesthetic

Craniomaxillofacial reconstructive surgery is a challenging field. First it aims to restore primary functions and second to preserve craniofacial anatomical features like symmetry and harmony. Three-dimensional (3D) printed biomodels have been widely adopted in medical fields by providing tactile feedback and a superior appreciation of visuospatial relationship between anatomical structures. Craniomaxillofacial reconstructive surgery was one of the first areas to implement 3D printing technology in their practice. Biomodeling has been used in craniofacial reconstruction of traumatic injuries, congenital disorders, tumor removal, iatrogenic injuries (e.g., decompressive craniectomies), orthognathic surgery, and implantology. 3D printing has proven to improve and enable an optimization of preoperative planning, develop intraoperative guidance tools, reduce operative time, and significantly improve the biofunctional and the aesthetic outcome. This technology has also shown great potential in enriching the teaching of medical students and surgical residents. The aim of this review is to present the current status of 3D printing technology and its practical and innovative applications, specifically in craniomaxillofacial reconstructive surgery, illustrated with two clinical cases where the 3D printing technology was successfully used.

scholarly journals Frontoethmoidal Encephalomeningocele Revisited : The Convenience Of Teamwork Approach, A CaseSeries

1970 ◽  
Vol 1 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadia Kusumastuti ◽  
Siti Handayani ◽  
Mendy Hatibie ◽  
Enrina Diah ◽  
Kristaninta Bangun
Keyword(s):  
Reconstructive Surgery ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Plastic Surgeon ◽  
Congenital Defect ◽  
Single Stage ◽  
Surgical Correction ◽  
The Other ◽  
Defect Correction ◽  
Plastic And Reconstructive Surgery ◽  
Aesthetic Results

Background: Frontoethmoidal encephalomeningocele (FEEM) is a congenital defect of the skull which poses many problems to the patient as it results in many craniofacial and neural morbidities. While recently surgical correction of this disease is done in a single-stage procedure, many in Indonesia still perform twostage surgery which bears more risks and is technically difficult to achieve good aesthetic results. This case series intend to assess the feasibility and convenience of teamwork approach between plastic surgeon and neurosurgeon in correcting FEEM in a single-stage operation. Methods:We reviewed 8 patients with FEEM treated in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Division, Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital Jakarta from November 2005 until March 2010. Four of the cases were secondary cases from Neurosurgery Department, and the other 4 cases were treated in single-stage operation, in teamwork with Neurosurgery Department, using the Chula technique. Results of each surgery was assessed using objective parameters, which are Intercanthal Distance (ICD) and Interorbital Distance (IOD); and also subjective parameters which is aesthetic improvement.Result: All of the patients showed significant improvements in ICD and IOD measurements. No complication was found intra and post-operatively. All patients, especially the ones treated with singlestage surgery show good aesthetic results. Conclusion: To achieve goals of defect correction and aesthetically pleasant appearance, single-stage surgery in teamwork with the neurosurgery department seems to be most suitable and convenient.

scholarly journals Imaging and printing in plastic and reconstructive surgery part 1: established techniques

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-68
Author(s):  
Michael P Chae ◽  
David J Hunter-Smith ◽  
Warren Matthew Rozen
Keyword(s):  
Reconstructive Surgery ◽  
3D Imaging ◽  
Preoperative Planning ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Volumetric Analysis ◽  
Imaging Modalities ◽  
Conventional Imaging ◽  
Plastic And Reconstructive Surgery ◽  
Printing Techniques ◽  
Ct And Mri

Background: An increasing number of reconstructive surgeons are using modern imaging technologies for preoperative planning and intraoperative surgical guidance. Conventional imaging modalities such as CT and MRI are relatively affordable and widely accessible and offer powerful functionalities. In the first of a two-part series, we evaluate established three-dimensional (3D) imaging and printing techniques based on CT and MRI used in plastic and reconstructive surgery. Method: A review of the published English literature dating from 1950 to 2017 was taken using databases such as PubMed, MEDLINE®, Web of Science and EMBASE. Result: In plastic and reconstructive surgery, the most commonly used, free software platforms are 3D Slicer (Surgical Planning Laboratory, Boston, MA, USA) and OsiriX (Pixmeo, Geneva, Switzerland). Perforator mapping using 3D-reconstructed images from computed tomography angiography (CTA) and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) is commonly used for preoperative planning. Three-dimensional volumetric analysis using current software techniques remains labour-intensive and reliant on operator experience. Three-dimensional printing has been investigated extensively since its introduction. As more free open-source software suites and affordable 3D printers become available, 3D printing is becoming more accessible for clinicians. Conclusion: Numerous studies have explored the application of 3D-rendered conventional imaging modalities for perforator mapping, volumetric analysis and printing. However, there is a lack of comprehensive review of all established 3D imaging and printing techniques in a language suitable for clinicians.

Three-dimensional printing in plastic and reconstructive surgery

2022 ◽  
pp. 221-236
Author(s):  
Efterpi Demiri ◽  
Georgia-Alexandra Spyropoulou ◽  
Antonios Tsimponis ◽  
Dimitrios Dionyssiou
Keyword(s):  
Reconstructive Surgery ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Three Dimensional Printing ◽  
Plastic And Reconstructive Surgery ◽  
Dimensional Printing

scholarly journals Imaging and printing in plastic and reconstructive surgery part 1: established techniques

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-68
Author(s):  
Michael Park Chae ◽  
David Hunter-Smith ◽  
Warren Rozen
Keyword(s):  
Reconstructive Surgery ◽  
3D Imaging ◽  
Preoperative Planning ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Volumetric Analysis ◽  
Imaging Modalities ◽  
Conventional Imaging ◽  
Plastic And Reconstructive Surgery ◽  
Printing Techniques ◽  
Ct And Mri

Background: An increasing number of reconstructive surgeons are using modern imaging technologies for preoperative planning and intraoperative surgical guidance. Conventional imaging modalities such as CT and MRI are relatively affordable and widely accessible and offer powerful functionalities. In the first of a two-part series, we evaluate established three-dimensional (3D) imaging and printing techniques based on CT and MRI used in plastic and reconstructive surgery. Method: A review of the published English literature dating from 1950 to 2017 was taken using databases such as PubMed, MEDLINE®, Web of Science and EMBASE. Result: In plastic and reconstructive surgery, the most commonly used, free software platforms are 3D Slicer (Surgical Planning Laboratory, Boston, MA, USA) and OsiriX (Pixmeo, Geneva, Switzerland). Perforator mapping using 3D-reconstructed images from computed tomography angiography (CTA) and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) is commonly used for preoperative planning. Three-dimensional volumetric analysis using current software techniques remains labour-intensive and reliant on operator experience. Three-dimensional printing has been investigated extensively since its introduction. As more free open-source software suites and affordable 3D printers become available, 3D printing is becoming more accessible for clinicians. Conclusion: Numerous studies have explored the application of 3D-rendered conventional imaging modalities for perforator mapping, volumetric analysis and printing. However, there is a lack of comprehensive review of all established 3D imaging and printing techniques in a language suitable for clinicians.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document