Advertisement

Design and validation of a 3D-printed simulator for endoscopic third ventriculostomy

  • Junhao Zhu
  • Jin Yang
  • Chao Tang
  • Zixiang Cong
  • Xiangming Cai
  • Chiyuan MaEmail author
Original Article
  • 28 Downloads

Abstract

Background

Simulation-based training has been considered as the most promising curriculum for neurosurgical education to finally improve surgical skills with the greatest efficiency and safety. However, most of the simulators including physical models and virtual reality systems are relatively expensive, which limits their promotion. In this study, the authors tried to develop a realistic, low-cost, and reusable simulator for endoscopic third ventriculostomy (ETV) and evaluate its validity.

Methods

A 3D-printed rigid skull with the ventricular system originated from a de-identified patient with obstructive hydrocephalus was constructed. The third ventricular floor was designed as a replaceable module. Thirty-nine neurosurgeons tested the simulator and a rating system was established to assess their performance. All participants filled out questionnaires to evaluate the simulator after training. Five neurosurgical students were recruited to finish the whole training for ten times in order to explore the learning curve of ETV.

Results

We found that (1) the more experienced surgeons performed obviously better than the rather inexperienced surgeons which verified that our model could reflect the ability of the trainees; (2) as the training progressed, the scores of the post-graduates increased and the fifth training average score was obviously higher than their first training average score. The feedback questionnaires showed the average scores for value of the simulator as a training tool and global rating were 3.15 and 3.54 (on a 4-point scale).

Conclusion

Our model was practical for ETV training. The results of our program showed that our model could precisely reflect the operators’ ability to perform ETV and could make it more efficient to master basic skills.

Keywords

Simulator Third ventriculostomy Endoscopy 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank the teaching and research section of anatomy, Nanjing University, for technical support and equipment assistance.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Bova FJ, Rajon DA, Friedman WA, Murad GJ, Hoh DJ, Jacob RP, Lampotang S, Lizdas DE, Lombard G, Lister JR (2013) Mixed-reality simulation for neurosurgical procedures. Neurosurgery 73(Suppl 1):138–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bouras T, Sgouros S (2011) Complications of endoscopic third ventriculostomy. J Neurosurg Pediatr 7(6):643–649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Weinstock P, Rehder R, Prabhu SP, Forbes PW, Roussin CJ, Cohen AR (2017) Creation of a novel simulator for minimally invasive neurosurgery: fusion of 3D printing and special effects. J Neurosurg Pediatr 20(1):1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Breimer GE, Bodani V, Looi T, Drake JM (2015) Design and evaluation of a new synthetic brain simulator for endoscopic third ventriculostomy. J Neurosurg Pediatr 15(1):82–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Filho FV, Coelho G, Cavalheiro S, Lyra M, Zymberg ST (2011) Quality assessment of a new surgical simulator for neuroendoscopic training. Neurosurg Focus 30(4):E17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hooten KG, Lister JR, Lombard G, Lizdas DE, Lampotang S, Rajon DA, Bova F, Murad GJ (2014) Mixed reality ventriculostomy simulation: experience in neurosurgical residency. Neurosurgery 10(Suppl 4):576–581 discussion 581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cohen AR, Lohani S, Manjila S, Natsupakpong S, Brown N, Cavusoglu MC (2013) Virtual reality simulation: basic concepts and use in endoscopic neurosurgery training. Childs Nerv Syst 29(8):1235–1244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Harrop J, Lobel DA, Bendok B, Sharan A, Rezai AR (2013) Developing a neurosurgical simulation-based educational curriculum: an overview. Neurosurgery 73(Suppl 1):25–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rehder R, Abd-El-Barr M, Hooten K, Weinstock P, Madsen JR, Cohen AR (2016) The role of simulation in neurosurgery. Childs Nerv Syst 32(1):43–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bryson EO, Levine AI (2008) The simulation theater: a theoretical discussion of concepts and constructs that enhance learning. J Crit Care 23(2):185–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wen G, Cong Z, Liu K, Tang C, Zhong C, Li L, Dai X, Ma C (2016) A practical 3D printed simulator for endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal surgery to improve basic operational skills. Childs Nerv Syst 32(6):1109–1116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tai BL, Rooney D, Stephenson F, Liao PS, Sagher O, Shih AJ, Savastano LE (2015) Development of a 3D-printed external ventricular drain placement simulator: technical note. J Neurosurg 123(4):1070–1076CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Junhao Zhu
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jin Yang
    • 1
    • 2
  • Chao Tang
    • 2
  • Zixiang Cong
    • 2
  • Xiangming Cai
    • 3
  • Chiyuan Ma
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.School of MedicineNanjing Medical UniversityNanjingChina
  2. 2.Department of Neurosurgery, Jinling Hospital, School of MedicineNanjing UniversityNanjingChina
  3. 3.School of medicineSoutheast UniversityNanjingChina

Personalised recommendations