Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Patient-specific desktop 3D-printed guides for pelvic tumour resection surgery: a precision study on cadavers

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

3D-printed patient-specific instruments have become a useful tool to improve accuracy in pelvic tumour resections. However, their correct placement can be challenging in some regions due to the morphology of the bone, so it is essential to be aware of the possible placement errors in each region. In this study, we characterize these errors in common pelvic osteotomies.

Methods

We conducted an experiment with 9 cadaveric specimens, for which we acquired a pre-operative computed tomography scan. Small PSIs were designed for each case following a realistic surgical approach for four regions of the pelvis: iliac crest (C), supra-acetabular (S), ischial (I), and pubic (P). Final surgical placement was based on a post-operative scan. The resulting positions were compared with pre-operative planning, obtaining translations, rotations, and maximum osteotomy deviations in a local reference frame defined based on the bone’s morphology.

Results

Mean translations and rotations in the direction of the osteotomy plane were as follows: C = 5.3 mm, 6.7°; S = 1.8 mm, 5.1°; I = 1.5 mm, 3.4°; P = 1.8 mm, 3.5°. Mean translations in the remaining axes were below 2 mm. Maximum osteotomy deviations (75% of cases) were below 11.8 mm in C (7.8 mm for half-length), 7.8 mm in S (5.5 mm for half-length), 5.5 mm in I, and 3.7 mm in P.

Conclusion

We have characterized placement errors for small PSIs in four regions of the pelvis. Our results show high errors in C and S PSIs in the direction of the resection plane’s normal, and thus large osteotomy deviations. Deviations in short osteotomies in S, I and P and placement errors in the remaining directions were low. The PSIs used in this study are biocompatible and can be produced with a desktop 3D printer, thus minimizing manufacturing cost.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material

The data analysed in the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Code availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. Liaw CY, Guvendiren M (2017) Current and emerging applications of 3D printing in medicine. Biofabrication. https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/aa7279

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Narita M, Takaki T, Shibahara T, Iwamoto M, Yakushiji T, Kamio T (2020) Utilization of desktop 3D printer-fabricated “Cost-Effective” 3D models in orthognathic surgery. Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40902-020-00269-0

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Chae MP, Rozen WM, McMenamin PG, Findlay MW, Spychal RT, Hunter-Smith DJ (2015) Emerging applications of bedside 3D printing in plastic surgery. Front Surg 2:1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2015.00025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Cromeens BP, Ray WC, Hoehne B, Abayneh F, Adler B, Besner GE (2017) Facilitating surgeon understanding of complex anatomy using a three-dimensional printed model. J Surg Res 216:18–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2017.04.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Sallent A, Vicente M, Reverté MM, Lopez A, Rodríguez-Baeza A, Pérez-Domínguez M, Velez R (2017) How 3D patient-specific instruments improve accuracy of pelvic bone tumour resection in a cadaveric study. Bone Jt Res 6:577–583. https://doi.org/10.1302/2046-3758.610.BJR-2017-0094.R1

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Wong KC, Sze KY, Wong IOL, Wong CM, Kumta SM (2016) Patient-specific instrument can achieve same accuracy with less resection time than navigation assistance in periacetabular pelvic tumor surgery: a cadaveric study. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 11:307–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-015-1250-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Cartiaux O, Docquier PL, Paul L, Francq BG, Cornu OH, Delloye C, Raucent B, Dehez B, Banse X (2008) Surgical inaccuracy of tumor resection and reconstruction within the pelvis: an experimental study. Acta Orthop 79:695–702. https://doi.org/10.1080/17453670810016731

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ma B, Park T, Chun I, Yun K (2018) The accuracy of a 3D printing surgical guide determined by CBCT and model analysis. J Adv Prosthodont 10:279–285. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2018.10.4.279

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Brouwers L, Teutelink A, van Tilborg FAJB, de Jongh MAC, Lansink KWW, Bemelman M (2019) Validation study of 3D-printed anatomical models using 2 PLA printers for preoperative planning in trauma surgery, a human cadaver study. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg 45:1013–1020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Fedorov A, Beichel R, Kalpathy-Cramer J, Finet J, Fillion-Robin JC, Pujol S, Bauer C, Jennings D, Fennessy F, Sonka M, Buatti J, Aylward S, Miller JV, Pieper S, Kikinis R (2012) 3D slicer as an image computing platform for the quantitative imaging network. Magn Reson Imaging 30:1323–1341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2012.05.001

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Besl PJ, McKay ND (1992) A method for registration of 3-D shapes. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 14:239–256. https://doi.org/10.1109/34.121791

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kawaguchi N, Matumoto S, Manabe J (1995) New method of evaluating the surgical margin and safety margin for musculoskeletal sarcoma, analysed on the basis of 457 surgical cases. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 121:555–563. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01197769

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Cleary K, Peters TM (2010) Image-guided interventions: technology review and clinical applications. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 12:119–142. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-bioeng-070909-105249

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gouin F, Paul L, Odri GA, Cartiaux O (2014) Computer-assisted planning and patient-specific 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  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Jentzsch T, Vlachopoulos L, Fürnstahl P, Müller DA, Fuchs B (2016) Tumor resection at the pelvis using three-dimensional planning and patient-specific instruments: a case series. World J Surg Oncol 14:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-016-1006-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. García-Sevilla M, García-Mato D, Calvo-Haro J, Pérez-Mañanes R, Pascau J (2019) Optimizing navigation with patient-specific 3D printed guides in pelvic tumor resection surgery. In: Proceedings of computer assisted radiology and surgery: CARS June 18–21, 2019, Rennes, France, pp 62–64

  17. Moreta-Martinez R, García-Mato D, García-Sevilla M, Pérez-Mañanes R, Calvo-Haro J, Pascau J (2018) Augmented reality in computer-assisted interventions based on patient-specific 3D printed reference. Healthc Technol Lett 5:162–166. https://doi.org/10.1049/htl.2018.5072

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Supported by project PI18/01625 (Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades, Instituto de Salud Carlos III and European Regional Development Fund "Una manera de hacer Europa").

Funding

This work was supported by project PI18/01625 (Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación, Instituto de Salud Carlos III and European Regional Development Fund “Una manera de hacer Europa.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Data acquisition and analysis were performed by Mónica García-Sevilla and María Teresa Ruiz-Alba. Mónica García-Sevilla wrote the main manuscript text and prepared all figures and tables. Lydia Mediavilla-Santos and José Antonio Calvo-Haro participated in the experiment. Javier Pascau substantially revised the manuscript text. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Javier Pascau.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

This article does not contain patient data.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

García-Sevilla, M., Mediavilla-Santos, L., Ruiz-Alba, M.T. et al. Patient-specific desktop 3D-printed guides for pelvic tumour resection surgery: a precision study on cadavers. Int J CARS 16, 397–406 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-021-02322-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-021-02322-3

Keywords

Navigation