3d打印的质量保证:患者特定3d打印血管解剖模型的尺寸精度研究。

Philip Nguyen, Ivan Stanislaus, Clover McGahon, Krishna Pattabathula, Samuel Bryant, Nigel Pinto, Jason Jenkins, Christoph Meinert
{"title":"3d打印的质量保证:患者特定3d打印血管解剖模型的尺寸精度研究。","authors":"Philip Nguyen,&nbsp;Ivan Stanislaus,&nbsp;Clover McGahon,&nbsp;Krishna Pattabathula,&nbsp;Samuel Bryant,&nbsp;Nigel Pinto,&nbsp;Jason Jenkins,&nbsp;Christoph Meinert","doi":"10.3389/fmedt.2023.1097850","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>3D printing enables the rapid manufacture of patient-specific anatomical models that substantially improve patient consultation and offer unprecedented opportunities for surgical planning and training. However, the multistep preparation process may inadvertently lead to inaccurate anatomical representations which may impact clinical decision making detrimentally. Here, we investigated the dimensional accuracy of patient-specific vascular anatomical models manufactured <i>via</i> digital anatomical segmentation and Fused-Deposition Modelling (FDM), Stereolithography (SLA), Selective Laser Sintering (SLS), and PolyJet 3D printing, respectively. All printing modalities reliably produced hand-held patient-specific models of high quality. Quantitative assessment revealed an overall dimensional error of 0.20 ± 3.23%, 0.53 ± 3.16%, -0.11 ± 2.81% and -0.72 ± 2.72% for FDM, SLA, PolyJet and SLS printed models, respectively, compared to unmodified Computed Tomography Angiograms (CTAs) data. Comparison of digital 3D models to CTA data revealed an average relative dimensional error of -0.83 ± 2.13% resulting from digital anatomical segmentation and processing. Therefore, dimensional error resulting from the print modality alone were 0.76 ± 2.88%, + 0.90 ± 2.26%, + 1.62 ± 2.20% and +0.88 ± 1.97%, for FDM, SLA, PolyJet and SLS printed models, respectively. Impact on absolute measurements of feature size were minimal and assessment of relative error showed a propensity for models to be marginally underestimated. This study revealed a high level of dimensional accuracy of 3D-printed patient-specific vascular anatomical models, suggesting they meet the requirements to be used as medical devices for clinical applications.</p>","PeriodicalId":12599,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Medical Technology","volume":"5 ","pages":"1097850"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9941637/pdf/","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quality assurance in 3D-printing: A dimensional accuracy study of patient-specific 3D-printed vascular anatomical models.\",\"authors\":\"Philip Nguyen,&nbsp;Ivan Stanislaus,&nbsp;Clover McGahon,&nbsp;Krishna Pattabathula,&nbsp;Samuel Bryant,&nbsp;Nigel Pinto,&nbsp;Jason Jenkins,&nbsp;Christoph Meinert\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fmedt.2023.1097850\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>3D printing enables the rapid manufacture of patient-specific anatomical models that substantially improve patient consultation and offer unprecedented opportunities for surgical planning and training. However, the multistep preparation process may inadvertently lead to inaccurate anatomical representations which may impact clinical decision making detrimentally. Here, we investigated the dimensional accuracy of patient-specific vascular anatomical models manufactured <i>via</i> digital anatomical segmentation and Fused-Deposition Modelling (FDM), Stereolithography (SLA), Selective Laser Sintering (SLS), and PolyJet 3D printing, respectively. All printing modalities reliably produced hand-held patient-specific models of high quality. Quantitative assessment revealed an overall dimensional error of 0.20 ± 3.23%, 0.53 ± 3.16%, -0.11 ± 2.81% and -0.72 ± 2.72% for FDM, SLA, PolyJet and SLS printed models, respectively, compared to unmodified Computed Tomography Angiograms (CTAs) data. Comparison of digital 3D models to CTA data revealed an average relative dimensional error of -0.83 ± 2.13% resulting from digital anatomical segmentation and processing. Therefore, dimensional error resulting from the print modality alone were 0.76 ± 2.88%, + 0.90 ± 2.26%, + 1.62 ± 2.20% and +0.88 ± 1.97%, for FDM, SLA, PolyJet and SLS printed models, respectively. Impact on absolute measurements of feature size were minimal and assessment of relative error showed a propensity for models to be marginally underestimated. This study revealed a high level of dimensional accuracy of 3D-printed patient-specific vascular anatomical models, suggesting they meet the requirements to be used as medical devices for clinical applications.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12599,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Medical Technology\",\"volume\":\"5 \",\"pages\":\"1097850\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9941637/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Medical Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fmedt.2023.1097850\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Medical Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fmedt.2023.1097850","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

3D打印能够快速制造患者特定的解剖模型,从而大大改善患者咨询,并为手术计划和培训提供前所未有的机会。然而,多步骤制备过程可能无意中导致不准确的解剖表征,这可能会对临床决策产生不利影响。在这里,我们分别研究了通过数字解剖分割和熔融沉积建模(FDM)、立体光刻(SLA)、选择性激光烧结(SLS)和PolyJet 3D打印制造的患者特定血管解剖模型的尺寸精度。所有打印方式都可靠地生产出高质量的手持患者特定模型。FDM、SLA、PolyJet和SLS打印模型的总体尺寸误差分别为0.20±3.23%、0.53±3.16%、-0.11±2.81%和-0.72±2.72%,与未修改的ct (cta)数据相比。数字三维模型与CTA数据的比较显示,由于数字解剖分割和处理,平均相对尺寸误差为-0.83±2.13%。因此,对于FDM、SLA、PolyJet和SLS打印模型,打印模态单独造成的尺寸误差分别为0.76±2.88%、+ 0.90±2.26%、+ 1.62±2.20%和+0.88±1.97%。对特征尺寸的绝对测量的影响是最小的,对相对误差的评估显示了模型被略微低估的倾向。本研究揭示了3d打印患者特异性血管解剖模型的高尺寸精度,表明它们符合临床应用的医疗器械要求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Quality assurance in 3D-printing: A dimensional accuracy study of patient-specific 3D-printed vascular anatomical models.

3D printing enables the rapid manufacture of patient-specific anatomical models that substantially improve patient consultation and offer unprecedented opportunities for surgical planning and training. However, the multistep preparation process may inadvertently lead to inaccurate anatomical representations which may impact clinical decision making detrimentally. Here, we investigated the dimensional accuracy of patient-specific vascular anatomical models manufactured via digital anatomical segmentation and Fused-Deposition Modelling (FDM), Stereolithography (SLA), Selective Laser Sintering (SLS), and PolyJet 3D printing, respectively. All printing modalities reliably produced hand-held patient-specific models of high quality. Quantitative assessment revealed an overall dimensional error of 0.20 ± 3.23%, 0.53 ± 3.16%, -0.11 ± 2.81% and -0.72 ± 2.72% for FDM, SLA, PolyJet and SLS printed models, respectively, compared to unmodified Computed Tomography Angiograms (CTAs) data. Comparison of digital 3D models to CTA data revealed an average relative dimensional error of -0.83 ± 2.13% resulting from digital anatomical segmentation and processing. Therefore, dimensional error resulting from the print modality alone were 0.76 ± 2.88%, + 0.90 ± 2.26%, + 1.62 ± 2.20% and +0.88 ± 1.97%, for FDM, SLA, PolyJet and SLS printed models, respectively. Impact on absolute measurements of feature size were minimal and assessment of relative error showed a propensity for models to be marginally underestimated. This study revealed a high level of dimensional accuracy of 3D-printed patient-specific vascular anatomical models, suggesting they meet the requirements to be used as medical devices for clinical applications.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Case Report: The effect of automated manual lymphatic drainage therapy on lymphatic contractility in 4 distinct cases Detection of natural autoimmunity to ghrelin in diabetes mellitus Ensuring safety and efficacy in combination products: regulatory challenges and best practices Augmented reality-based software (Echo-QR) for guiding the echographic probe toward the acoustic window: a pilot study Ethical considerations in the regulation and use of herbal medicines in the European Union
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1