THREE-DIMENSIONAL MODEL PRINTING IN ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY: COMPARISON OF THREE-DIMENSIONAL MODELS AND MULTISLICE COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANS
Objective: The objective of this study is to compare fabrication of commonly used three-dimensional (3D) models with original multislice computed tomography (MSCT) scan data for accuracy and precision in reconstruction surgery.
Methods: MSCT data from 10Â samples are processed and manufactured to be 3D models. Both groups are then measured and analyzed for the purpose of comparison.
Results: The average mandibular measurement difference between 3D models and MSCT scans is 0.26Â mm more <2%. The final results of the comparison reveal high accuracy in 3D models compared to MSCT scan data.
Conclusion: The 3D model could be considered as surgical guidance for maxillofacial reconstruction surgery since it yields highly accurate results.
2. Reinbacher KE, Wallner J, KÃ¤rcher H, Pau M, Quehenberger F, Feichtinger M. Three dimensional comparative measurement of polyurethane milled skull models based on CT and MRI data sets. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2012;40:e419-25.
3. Huotilainen E, Jaanimets R, ValÃ¡Å¡ek J, MarciÃ¡n P, Salmi M, Tuomi J, et al. Inaccuracies in additive manufactured medical skull models caused by the DICOM to STL conversion process. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2014;42:e259-65.
4. Wang CS, Wang WH, Lin MC. STL rapid prototyping bio-cad model for CT medical image segmentation. Comput Ind 2010;61:187-97.
5. Essig H, Rana M, Kokemueller H, von See C, Ruecker M, Tavassol F, et al. Pre-operative planning for mandibular reconstruction-a full digital planning workflow resulting in a patient specific reconstruction. Head Neck Oncol 2011;3:45.
6. Wang G, Li J, Khadka A, Hsu Y, Li W, Hu J. CAD/CAM and rapid prototyped titanium for reconstruction of ramus defect and condylar fracture caused by mandibular reduction. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2012;113:356-61.
7. Zheng GS, Su YX, Liao GQ, Chen ZF, Wang L, Jiao PF, et al. Mandible reconstruction assisted by preoperative virtual surgical simulation. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2012;113:604-11.
8. Salmi M, Paloheimo KS, Tuomi J, Wolff J, MÃ¤kitie A. Accuracy of medical models made by additive manufacturing (rapid manufacturing). J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2013;41:603-9.
9. Olszewski R, Szymor P, Kozakiewicz M. Accuracy of three-dimensional, paper-based models generated using a low-cost, three-dimensional printer. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2014;42:1847-52.
10. Taufik M, Jain PK. A study of build edge profile for prediction of surface roughness in fused deposition modeling. J Manuf Sci Eng 2016;138:061002-11.
11. El-Katatny I, Masood SH, Morsi YS. Error analysis of fdm fabricated medical replicas. Rapid Prototyp J 2010;16:36-43.
12. Cohen A, Laviv A, Berman P, Nashef R, Abu-Tair J. Mandibular reconstruction using stereolithographic 3-dimensional printing modeling technology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2009;108:661-6.
13. Yamauchi T, Yamazaki M, Okawa A, Furuya T, Hayashi K, Sakuma T, et al. Efficacy and reliability of highly functional open source DICOM software (OsiriX) in spine surgery. J Clin Neurosci 2010;17:756-9.
14. Kim G, Jung HJ, Lee HJ, Lee JS, Koo S, Chang SH. Accuracy and reliability of length measurements on three-dimensional CT using open-source osirix software. J Digit Imaging 2012;25:486-91.
15. Mallepree T, Bergers D. Accuracy of medical RP models. Rapid Prototyp J 2009;15:325-32.
16. Stull KE, Tise ML, Ali Z, Fowler DR. Accuracy and reliability of measurements obtained from CT 3D volume rendered images. Forensic Sci Int 2014;238:133-40.
17. Nizam A, Gopal RN, Naing L, Hakim AB, Samsudin AR. Dimensional accuracy of the skull models produced by rapid prototyping technology using STL apparatus. Arch Orofac Sci 2006;1:60-6.