The Journal of invasive cardiology · 2022
3D Printing for Mesenteric Artery Endovascular Interventions: Feasibility and Utility for Preprocedural Planning and Angiographic Correlation.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Memon Sehrish, Friend Evan, Janzer Sean, Kalra Sanjog, George Jon C
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Three-dimensional (3D) printing of mesenteric artery (MA) anatomy preprocedurally for endovascular interventions can allow strategic preprocedure planning and improve procedure-related clinical outcomes.
METHODS: Three patients with computed tomography angiography (CTA) of the abdomen and pelvis who subsequently underwent MA interventions were 3D printed retrospectively, and 2 patients with symptoms and severe MA stenosis on CTA, who had not undergone intervention, were 3D printed for procedure-related planning and anatomy-specific implications. The 3D-printed models (3D-PMs) were painted with acrylic paint to highlight anatomy. Reference vessel size, lesion length (LL), and renal artery (RA) to MA distance were determined using a digital millimeter caliper.
RESULTS: Each of the 5 patients with variable anatomy, including an MA chronic total occlusion (CTO), were successfully 3D printed. A digital caliper allowed determination of vessel size, LL, and RA to MA distance, which were then compared with intraprocedural MA angiograms and intravascular imaging when available. Further complex anatomies, such as intraprocedural navigation in the setting of prior abdominal aortic endograft and CTO assessment with relevance to cap morphology, small branch arteries, and collateral flow, were also successfully 3D printed.
CONCLUSION: Preprocedural 3D printing of MA anatomy for interventions can theoretically lead to decreases in contrast use, radiation dose, and fluoroscopic and procedural times, as well as enhance comprehension of complex patient-specific anatomy.
METHODS: Three patients with computed tomography angiography (CTA) of the abdomen and pelvis who subsequently underwent MA interventions were 3D printed retrospectively, and 2 patients with symptoms and severe MA stenosis on CTA, who had not undergone intervention, were 3D printed for procedure-related planning and anatomy-specific implications. The 3D-printed models (3D-PMs) were painted with acrylic paint to highlight anatomy. Reference vessel size, lesion length (LL), and renal artery (RA) to MA distance were determined using a digital millimeter caliper.
RESULTS: Each of the 5 patients with variable anatomy, including an MA chronic total occlusion (CTO), were successfully 3D printed. A digital caliper allowed determination of vessel size, LL, and RA to MA distance, which were then compared with intraprocedural MA angiograms and intravascular imaging when available. Further complex anatomies, such as intraprocedural navigation in the setting of prior abdominal aortic endograft and CTO assessment with relevance to cap morphology, small branch arteries, and collateral flow, were also successfully 3D printed.
CONCLUSION: Preprocedural 3D printing of MA anatomy for interventions can theoretically lead to decreases in contrast use, radiation dose, and fluoroscopic and procedural times, as well as enhance comprehension of complex patient-specific anatomy.