Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Update 3D-Druck in der Chirurgie muskuloskeletaler Tumoren

Update on 3D printing in the surgery of musculoskeletal tumors

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Der Unfallchirurg Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

In der muskuloskeletalen Tumorchirurgie haben 3D-Druck-Verfahren in den letzten Jahren an Bedeutung gewonnen. Schon vor dem Zeitalter des 3D-Drucks haben sich computergestützte Anwendungen wie die Navigation als hilfreich erwiesen. Aufgrund des variablen Erscheinungsbildes der Erkrankungen besteht der Bedarf an individualisierten Lösungen. Der 3D-Druck kann für die Entwicklung anatomischer Anschauungsmodelle, für die Herstellung patientenindividueller Instrumente und patientenspezifische Implantate zur Anwendung kommen. Für die 3 Einsatzgebiete existieren unterschiedliche regulatorische Hürden. Insbesondere bei der Resektion von Beckentumoren scheinen 3D-Druck-Verfahren Vorteile aufgrund der komplizierten anatomischen Verhältnisse und der Nachbarschaft zu relevanten neurovaskulären Strukturen zu bieten. Die Möglichkeiten des Titandrucks haben das Feld eröffnet, Implantate herzustellen, die sich exakt in entsprechende Defekte einpassen lassen.

Abstract

The importance of 3D printing applications in the surgery of musculoskeletal tumors has increased in recent years. Even prior to the era of 3D printing, computer-assisted techniques, such as navigation, have proved their utility. Due to the variable appearance of bone tumors, there is a need for individual solutions. The 3D printing can be used for the development of anatomical demonstration models, the construction of patient-specific instruments and custom-made implants. For these three applications, different regulatory hurdles exist. Especially for the resection of pelvic tumors, 3D printing technologies seem to provide advantages due to the complicated anatomy and the proximity to relevant neurovascular structures. With the introduction of titanium printing, construction of individualized implants that fit exactly into the defect became feasible.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4
Abb. 5
Abb. 6
Abb. 7
Abb. 8

Literatur

  1. Mumith A, Thomas M, Shah Z, Coathup M, Blunn G (2018) Additive manufacturing current concepts, future trends. Bone Joint J 100B(4):455–460. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.100B4.BJJ-2017-0662.R2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. McCulloch RA, Frisoni T, Kurunskal V, Donati DM, Jeys L (2021) Computer navigation and 3d printing in the surgical management of bone sarcoma. Cells 10(2):1–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/cells10020195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Fujiwara T, Sree DV, Stevenson J, Kaneuchi Y, Parry M, Tsuda Y, Le Nail LR, Medellin RM, Grimer R, Jeys L (2020) Acetabular reconstruction with an ice-cream cone prosthesis following resection of pelvic tumors: Does computer navigation improve surgical outcome? J Surg Oncol. 121(7):1104–1114. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.25882

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Nandra R, Matharu G, Stevenson J, Parry M, Grimer R, Jeys L (2019) Long-term outcomes after an initial experience of computer-navigated resection of primary pelvic and sacral bone tumours: soft-tissue margins must be adequate to reduce local recurrences. Bone Joint J. 101-B(4):484–490. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.101B4.BJJ-2018-0981.R1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bosma SE, Cleven AHG, Dijkstra PDS (2019) Can navigation improve the ability to achieve tumor-free margins in pelvic and sacral primary bone sarcoma resections ? A historically controlled study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 477(7):1548–1559. https://doi.org/10.1097/CORR.0000000000000766

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Abraham JA, Kenneally B, Bs KA, Geller DS (2018) Can navigation-assisted surgery help achieve negative margins in resection of pelvic and sacral tumors ? Clin Orthop Relat Res 476(3):499–508. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999.0000000000000064

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Shehadeh AM, Isleem U, Abdelal S, Salameh H, Abdelhalim M (2019) Surgical technique and outcome of custom joint-sparing endoprosthesis as a reconstructive modality in juxta-articular bone sarcoma. J Oncol 26;2019:9417284. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/9417284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bosma SE, Wong KC, Paul L, Gerbers JG, Jutte PC (2018) A cadaveric comparative study on the surgical accuracy of freehand , computer navigation , and patient-specific instruments in joint-preserving Bone tumor resections. Sarcoma 13;2018:4065846. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/4065846

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Luetke A, Meyers PA, Lewis I, Juergens H (2014) Osteosarcoma treatment—where do we stand? A state of the art review. Cancer Treat Rev 40(4):523–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctrv.2013.11.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Jeys LM, Thorne CJ, Parry M, Gaston CLL, Sumathi VP, Grimer JR (2017) A novel system for the surgical staging of primary high-grade osteosarcoma: the birmingham classification. Clin Orthop Relat Res 475(3):842–850. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-016-4851-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Jaffe N, Bruland ØS, Bielack S (2009) Pediatric and adolescent osteosarcoma: editorial summation. Cancer Treat Res 152:573–575. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0284-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Andreou D, Bielack SS, Carrle D et al (2011) The influence of tumor- and treatment-related factors on the development of local recurrence in osteosarcoma after adequate surgery. An analysis of 1355 patients treated on neoadjuvant Cooperative Osteosarcoma Study Group protocols. Ann Oncol 22(5):1228–1235. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdq589

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Carrle D, Bielack S (2009) Osteosarcoma lung metastases detection and principles of multimodal therapy. Cancer Treat Res 2009;152:165–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0284-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Errani C, Longhi A, Rossi G et al (2011) Palliative therapy for osteosarcoma. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 11(2):217–227. https://doi.org/10.1586/era.10.172

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Cartiaux O, Docquier P, Paul L et al (2008) Surgical inaccuracy of tumor resection and reconstruction within the pelvis an experimental study. Acta Orthop 79(5):695–702. https://doi.org/10.1080/17453670810016731

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ozaki BT, Flege S, Kevric M et al (2013) Osteosarcoma of the pelvis : experience of the cooperative osteosarcoma study group. J Clin Oncol 21(2):334–341. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2003.01.142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Fuchs B, Hoekzema N, Sim FH (2009) Osteosarcoma of the Pelvis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467(2):510–518. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-008-0495-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Eggers H, Wichmann J, Omar M, Länger F, Ivanyi P (2021) Onkologische Aspekte der Behandlung pathologischer Frakturen [Oncologic aspects in treatment of pathologic fractures]. Unfallchirurg 124(9):731–737. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00113-021-01051-1

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Omar M, Graulich T, Von Falck C, Bruns N (2021) Versorgungsstrategien bei tumorbedingten pathologischen Frakturen der Extremitäten. Unfallchirurg 124(9):704–719. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00113-021-01056-w

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Fang C, Cai H, Kuong E et al (2019) Surgical applications of three-dimensional printing in the pelvis and acetabulum: from models and tools to implants. Unfallchirurg 122(4):278–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00113-019-0626-8

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Garg B, Gupta M, Singh M, Kalyanasundaram D (2019) Outcome and safety analysis of 3D-printed patient-specific pedicle screw jigs for complex spinal deformities: a comparative study. spine J 19(1):56–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2018.05.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Hung CC, Li YT, Chou YC et al (2019) Conventional plate fixation method versus pre-operative virtual simulation and three-dimensional printing-assisted contoured plate fixation method in the treatment of anterior pelvic ring fracture. Int Orthop 43(2):425–431. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-018-3963-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Jafary-Zadeh M, Kumar GP, Branicio PS, Seifi M, Lewandowski JJ, Cui F (2018) A critical review on metallic glasses as structural materials for cardiovascular stent applications. J Funct Biomater 9(1):1–32. https://doi.org/10.3390/jfb9010019

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Arens S, Hansis M (1996) Titanium implants in accident surgery—when are they necessary? Langenbecks Arch Chir Suppl Kongressbd 113(32):938–940

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Schulze M, Gosheger G, Bockholt S et al (2021) Complex bone tumors of the trunk—the role of 3d printing and navigation in tumor orthopedics: A case series and review of the literature. J Pers Med. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm11060517

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Gebert C, Wessling M, Gosheger G et al (2013) Pelvic reconstruction with compound osteosynthesis following hemipelvectomy: a clinical study. Bone Joint J 95 B(10):1410–1416. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.95B10.31123

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Bellanova L, Paul L, Docquier P (2013) Surgical guides ( patient-specific instruments ) for pediatric tibial bone sarcoma resection and allograft reconstruction. Sarcoma 2013:787653. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/787653

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Gouin F, Paul L, Odri GA, Cartiaux O (2014) Instruments for bone tumor resection within the pelvis : a series of 11 patients. Sarcoma 2014:842709. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/842709

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Park JW, Kang HG, Kim JH, Kim HS (2021) The application of 3D-printing technology in pelvic bone tumor surgery. J Orthop Sci 26(2):276–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jos.2020.03.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Evrard R, Schubert T, Paul L, Docquier P (2019) Resection margins obtained with patient-specific instruments for resecting primary pelvic bone sarcomas : a case-control study. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 105(4):781–787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2018.12.016

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Ji T, Yang Y, Tang X, Liang H, Yan T, Yang R, Guo W (2020) 3D-Printed Modular Hemipelvic Endoprosthetic Reconstruction Following Periacetabular Tumor Resection: Early Results of 80 Consecutive Cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am 102(17):1530–1541. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.19.01437

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Swartman B, Franke J, Schnurr C, Märdian S, Willy C, AG Digitalisierung der DGOU; AGiTEC der DGU, Back DA (2020) Digitaler OP [Digital OR]. Unfallchirurg 123(11):849–855. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00113-020-00886-4

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Klinik für Unfallchirurgie, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Deutschland

    Mohamed Omar & Nico Bruns

  2. Klinik für Allgemeine Orthopädie und Tumororthopädie, Universitätsklinikum Münster, Albert-Schweitzer Campus 1, 48149, Münster, Deutschland

    Martin Schulze, Daniel Kotrych & Georg Gosheger

  3. Department of Orthopaedics, Traumatology and Orthopaedic Oncology, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, Szczecin, Polen

    Mohamed Omar

  4. Orthopädische Klinik, DIAKOVERE, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Hannover, Deutschland

    Max Ettinger

Authors
  1. Mohamed Omar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Martin Schulze
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nico Bruns
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Daniel Kotrych
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Georg Gosheger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Max Ettinger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohamed Omar.

Ethics declarations

Interessenkonflikt

M. Omar, M. Schulze, N. Bruns, D. Kotrych, G. Gosheger und M. Ettinger geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Für diesen Beitrag wurden von den Autoren keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren durchgeführt. Für die aufgeführten Studien gelten die jeweils dort angegebenen ethischen Richtlinien.

Additional information

Redaktion

Christian Krettek, Hannover

Die Autoren Mohamed Omar und Martin Schulze teilen sich die Erstautorenschaft.

figure qr

QR-Code scannen & Beitrag online lesen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Omar, M., Schulze, M., Bruns, N. et al. Update 3D-Druck in der Chirurgie muskuloskeletaler Tumoren. Unfallchirurg 125, 361–370 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00113-022-01160-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00113-022-01160-5

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation