Skeletal Radiology

, Volume 45, Issue 10, pp 1431–1435 | Cite as

Three-dimensional printing for preoperative planning of total hip arthroplasty revision: case report

  • Joseph Zerr
  • Yonatan Chatzinoff
  • Rajiv Chopra
  • Kenneth Estrera
  • Avneesh ChhabraEmail author
Case Report


Three dimensional (3D) printing can be used to create material models to aid preoperative planning of complex orthopedic procedures as exemplified by this case of total hip arthroplasty failure due to infection with resulting severe acetabular bone stock deficiency. The 3D model allowed for trialing of the acetabular component to determine cup size, position, and screw placement. Most importantly, the model confirmed that there was not a pelvic discontinuity and the revision shell would be sufficient for the reconstruction. Previously, the cost and complexity of utilization of 3D printers were prohibitive. Recent improvements in commercially available 3D printers have made rapid prototype model creation a realistic option, which can facilitate difficult surgery.


3D printing Hip replacement Hip revision 3D model Infection 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Dr. Avneesh Chhabra is a Siemens MSK CAD consultant and receives royalties from Wolters and Jaypee unrelated to this project. The remaining authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Chung KJ, Hong DY, Kim YT, Yang I, Park YW, Kim HN. Preshaping plates for minimally invasive fixation of calcaneal fractures using a real-size 3D-printed model as a preoperative and intraoperative tool. Foot Ankle Int. 2014;35(11):1231–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ciocca L, De Crescenzio F, Fantini M, Scotti R. CAD/CAM and rapid prototyped scaffold construction for bone regenerative medicine and surgical transfer of virtual planning: a pilot study. Comput Med Imaging Graph. 2009;33(1):58–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jastifer JR, Gustafson PA. Three-dimensional printing and surgical simulation for preoperative planning of deformity correction in foot and ankle surgery. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2016.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ma L, Zhou Y, Zhu Y, Lin Z, Wang Y, Zhang Y, et al. 3D-printed guiding templates for improved osteosarcoma resection. Sci Rep. 2016;6:23335.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Windisch G, Salaberger D, Rosmarin W, Kastner J, Exner GU, Haldi-Brändle V, et al. A model for clubfoot based on micro-CT data. J Anat. 2007;210(6):761–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gittard SD, Narayan RJ, Lusk J, Morel P, Stockmans F, Ramsey M, et al. Rapid prototyping of scaphoid and lunate bones. Biotechnol J. 2009;4(1):129–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Guarino J, Tennyson S, McCain G, Bond L, Shea K, King H. Rapid prototyping technology for surgeries of the pediatric spine and pelvis: benefits analysis. J Pediatr Orthop. 2007;27(8):955–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    McGurk M, Amis AA, Potamianos P, Goodger NM. Rapid prototyping techniques for anatomical modelling in medicine. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1997;79(3):169–74.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Giovinco NA, Dunn SP, Dowling L, Smith C, Trowell L, Ruch JA, et al. A novel combination of printed 3-dimensional anatomic templates and computer-assisted surgical simulation for virtual preoperative planning in Charcot foot reconstruction. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2012;51(3):387–93.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Holubar SD, Hassinger JP, Dozois EJ, Camp JC, Farley DR, Fidler JL, et al. Virtual pelvic anatomy and surgery simulator: an innovative tool for teaching pelvic surgical anatomy. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2009;142:122–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bizzotto N, Sandri A, Regis D, Romani D, Tami I, Magnan B. Three-dimensional printing of bone fractures: a new tangible realistic way for preoperative planning and education. Surg Innov. 2015;22(5):548–51.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Li H, Qu X, Mao Y, Dai K, Zhu Z. Custom acetabular cages offer stable fixation and improved hip scores for revision THA with severe bone defects. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016;474(3):731–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hurson C, Tansey A, O’Donnchadha B, Nicholson P, Rice J, McElwain J. Rapid prototyping in the assessment, classification and preoperative planning of acetabular fractures. Injury. 2007;38(10):1158–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zeng C, Xiao J, Wu Z, Huang W. Evaluation of three-dimensional printing for internal fixation of unstable pelvic fracture from minimal invasive para-rectus abdominis approach: a preliminary report. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015;8(8):13039–44.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Xu J, Li D, Ma RF, Barden B, Ding Y. Application of rapid prototyping pelvic model for patients with DDH to facilitate arthroplasty planning: a pilot study. J Arthroplasty. 2015;30(11):1963–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fedorov A, Beichel R, Kalpathy-Cramer J, Finet J, Fillion-Robin JC, Pujol S, et al. 3D Slicer as an image computing platform for the quantitative imaging network. Magn Reson Imaging. 2012;30(9):1323–41.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Paprosky WG, Perona PG, Lawrence JM. Acetabular defect classification and surgical reconstruction in revision arthroplasty: a 6-year follow-up evaluation. J Arthroplasty. 1994;9(1):33–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ISS 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joseph Zerr
    • 1
  • Yonatan Chatzinoff
    • 1
  • Rajiv Chopra
    • 1
    • 2
  • Kenneth Estrera
    • 3
  • Avneesh Chhabra
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical CenterDallasUSA
  2. 2.Advanced Imaging Research CenterUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical CenterDallasUSA
  3. 3.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical CenterDallasUSA

Personalised recommendations