2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Accuracy Assessment of Molded, Patient-Specific Polymethylmethacrylate Craniofacial Implants Compared to Their 3D Printed Originals

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The use of patient-specific implants (PSIs) in craniofacial surgery is often limited due to a lack of expertise and/or production costs. Therefore, a simple and cost-efficient template-based fabrication workflow has been developed to overcome these disadvantages. The aim of this study is to assess the accuracy of PSIs made from their original templates. For a representative cranial defect (CRD) and a temporo-orbital defect (TOD), ten PSIs were made from polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) using computer-aided design (CAD) and three-dimensional (3D) printing technology. These customized implants were measured and compared with their original 3D printed templates. The implants for the CRD revealed a root mean square (RMS) value ranging from 1.128 to 0.469 mm with a median RMS (Q1 to Q3) of 0.574 (0.528 to 0.701) mm. Those for the TOD revealed an RMS value ranging from 1.079 to 0.630 mm with a median RMS (Q1 to Q3) of 0.843 (0.635 to 0.943) mm. This study demonstrates that a highly precise duplication of PSIs can be achieved using this template-molding workflow. Thus, virtually planned implants can be accurately transferred into haptic PSIs. This workflow appears to offer a sophisticated solution for craniofacial reconstruction and continues to prove itself in daily clinical practice.

          Related collections

          Most cited references37

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Measuring and Establishing the Accuracy and Reproducibility of 3D Printed Medical Models

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Patient-Specific Surgical Implants Made of 3D Printed PEEK: Material, Technology, and Scope of Surgical Application

            Additive manufacturing (AM) is rapidly gaining acceptance in the healthcare sector. Three-dimensional (3D) virtual surgical planning, fabrication of anatomical models, and patient-specific implants (PSI) are well-established processes in the surgical fields. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) has been used, mainly in the reconstructive surgeries as a reliable alternative to other alloplastic materials for the fabrication of PSI. Recently, it has become possible to fabricate PEEK PSI with Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF) technology. 3D printing of PEEK using FFF allows construction of almost any complex design geometry, which cannot be manufactured using other technologies. In this study, we fabricated various PEEK PSI by FFF 3D printer in an effort to check the feasibility of manufacturing PEEK with 3D printing. Based on these preliminary results, PEEK can be successfully used as an appropriate biomaterial to reconstruct the surgical defects in a “biomimetic” design.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Cranioplasty: Review of materials and techniques

              Cranioplasty is the surgical intervention to repair cranial defects. The aim of cranioplasty is not only a cosmetic issue; also, the repair of cranial defects gives relief to psychological drawbacks and increases the social performances. Many different types of materials were used throughout the history of cranioplasty. With the evolving biomedical technology, new materials are available to be used by the surgeons. Although many different materials and techniques had been described, there is still no consensus about the best material, and ongoing researches on both biologic and nonbiologic substitutions continue aiming to develop the ideal reconstruction materials. In this article, the principle materials and techniques of cranioplasty are reviewed.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Clin Med
                J Clin Med
                jcm
                Journal of Clinical Medicine
                MDPI
                2077-0383
                19 March 2020
                March 2020
                : 9
                : 3
                : 832
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Oral and Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital Basel, CH-4031 Basel, Switzerland; dave.chamo@ 123456stud.unibas.ch (D.C.); neha.sharma@ 123456usb.ch (N.S.); christoph.kunz@ 123456usb.ch (C.K.); ft@ 123456swiss-mam.ch (F.M.T.)
                [2 ]Medical Additive Manufacturing Research Group (Swiss MAM), Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Basel, CH-4123 Allschwil, Switzerland
                [3 ]Basel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Department of Clinical Research, University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, CH-4031 Basel, Switzerland; soheila.aghlmandi@ 123456usb.ch
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: bilal.msallem@ 123456usb.ch
                [†]

                Bilal Msallem and Dave Chamo contributed equally to this manuscript and should be considered co-first authors.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0885-1195
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3299-0945
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3035-9308
                Article
                jcm-09-00832
                10.3390/jcm9030832
                7141183
                32204321
                72b3dedb-89dc-4069-b71c-71f5cab144ac
                © 2020 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 31 December 2019
                : 14 March 2020
                Categories
                Article

                3d printing,accuracy,additive manufacturing,craniofacial reconstruction,cranioplasty,molding,patient-specific implant,pmma

                Comments

                Comment on this article