Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology Canada : JOGC = Journal d'obstetrique et gynecologie du Canada : JOGC · 2024
The Value of Using Patient-Specific 3D-Printed Anatomical Models in Surgical Planning for Patients With Complex Multifibroid Uteri.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Flaxman Teresa E, Cooke Carly M, Miguel Olivier X, Sheikh Adnan, McInnes Matthew, Duigenan Shauna, Singh Sukhbir Sony
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To compare surgeon responses regarding their surgical plan before and after receiving a patient-specific three-dimensional (3D)-printed model of a patient's multifibroid uterus created from their magnetic resonance imaging.
METHODS: 3D-printed models were derived from standard-of-care pelvic magnetic resonance images of patients scheduled for surgical intervention for multifibroid uterus. Relevant anatomical structures were printed using a combination of transparent and opaque resin types. 3D models were used for 7 surgical cases (5 myomectomies, 2 hysterectomies). A staff surgeon and 1 or 2 surgical fellow(s) were present for each case. Surgeons completed a questionnaire before and after receiving the model documenting surgical approach, perceived difficulty, and confidence in surgical plan. A postoperative questionnaire was used to assess surgeon experience using 3D models.
RESULTS: Two staff surgeons and 3 clinical fellows participated in this study. A total of 15 surgeon responses were collected across the 7 cases. After viewing the models, an increase in perceived surgical difficulty and confidence in surgical plan was reported in 12/15 and 7/15 responses, respectively. Anticipated surgical time had a mean ± SD absolute change of 44.0 ± 47.9 minutes and anticipated blood loss had an absolute change of 100 ± 103.5 cc. 2 of 15 responses report a change in pre-surgical approach. Intra-operative model reference was reported to change the dissection route in 8/15 surgeon responses. On average, surgeons rated their experience using 3D models 8.6/10 for pre-surgical planning and 8.1/10 for intra-operative reference.
CONCLUSIONS: Patient-specific 3D anatomical models may be a useful tool to increase a surgeon's understanding of complex gynaecologic anatomy and to improve their surgical plan. Future work is needed to evaluate the impact of 3D models on surgical outcomes in gynaecology.
METHODS: 3D-printed models were derived from standard-of-care pelvic magnetic resonance images of patients scheduled for surgical intervention for multifibroid uterus. Relevant anatomical structures were printed using a combination of transparent and opaque resin types. 3D models were used for 7 surgical cases (5 myomectomies, 2 hysterectomies). A staff surgeon and 1 or 2 surgical fellow(s) were present for each case. Surgeons completed a questionnaire before and after receiving the model documenting surgical approach, perceived difficulty, and confidence in surgical plan. A postoperative questionnaire was used to assess surgeon experience using 3D models.
RESULTS: Two staff surgeons and 3 clinical fellows participated in this study. A total of 15 surgeon responses were collected across the 7 cases. After viewing the models, an increase in perceived surgical difficulty and confidence in surgical plan was reported in 12/15 and 7/15 responses, respectively. Anticipated surgical time had a mean ± SD absolute change of 44.0 ± 47.9 minutes and anticipated blood loss had an absolute change of 100 ± 103.5 cc. 2 of 15 responses report a change in pre-surgical approach. Intra-operative model reference was reported to change the dissection route in 8/15 surgeon responses. On average, surgeons rated their experience using 3D models 8.6/10 for pre-surgical planning and 8.1/10 for intra-operative reference.
CONCLUSIONS: Patient-specific 3D anatomical models may be a useful tool to increase a surgeon's understanding of complex gynaecologic anatomy and to improve their surgical plan. Future work is needed to evaluate the impact of 3D models on surgical outcomes in gynaecology.