s41205 018 0030 y PDF

Chepelev et al.
3D Printing in Medicine (2018) 4:11

https://doi.org/10.1186/s41205-018-0030-y
RESEARCH Open Access
Radiological Society of North America

(RSNA) 3D printing Special Interest Group
(SIG): guidelines for medical 3D printing
and appropriateness for clinical scenarios
Leonid Chepelev1†, Nicole Wake2,3†, Justin Ryan4†, Waleed Althobaity1†, Ashish Gupta1†, Elsa Arribas5†,
Lumarie Santiago5†, David H Ballard6, Kenneth C Wang7, William Weadock8, Ciprian N Ionita9, Dimitrios Mitsouras1,
Jonathan Morris10, Jane Matsumoto10, Andy Christensen1, Peter Liacouras11, Frank J Rybicki1*, Adnan Sheikh1
and RSNA Special Interest Group for 3D Printing
Abstract
Medical three-dimensional (3D) printing has expanded dramatically over the past three decades with growth in
both facility adoption and the variety of medical applications. Consideration for each step required to create
accurate 3D printed models from medical imaging data impacts patient care and management. In this paper, a
writing group representing the Radiological Society of North America Special Interest Group on 3D Printing (SIG)
provides recommendations that have been vetted and voted on by the SIG active membership. This body of work
includes appropriate clinical use of anatomic models 3D printed for diagnostic use in the care of patients with
specific medical conditions. The recommendations provide guidance for approaches and tools in medical 3D
printing, from image acquisition, segmentation of the desired anatomy intended for 3D printing, creation of a
3D-printable model, and post-processing of 3D printed anatomic models for patient care.
Keywords: 3D printing, Appropriateness, Guideline, Quality, Radiology, Additive manufacturing, Anatomic model
Background Printing) described for proposed new billing codes, in-

In 2016, the Radiological Society of North America cluding those for the American Medical Association.
(RSNA) approved a proposal to create the Special Inter- These practice parameters and recommendations are
est Group on 3D Printing (SIG). This document fulfills not intended as comprehensive standards but do reflect
two of the original SIG goals: to provide recommenda- several salient aspects of clinical anatomic modeling and
tions towards consistent and safe production of 3D appropriateness. The guidelines subcommittee of the
printed models derived from medical images, and to de- SIG will maintain and devote the time and effort neces-
scribe a set of clinical scenarios for 3D printing is appro- sary to continually develop and update these recommen-
priate for the intended use of caring for patients with dations. This subcommittee is comprised of volunteer
those medical conditions. This project also fills a previ- members of the SIG who form the writing group of this
ously unmet need for practice parameters/guidelines re- document.
garding the clinical service of anatomic modeling (3D In its current state, medical 3D printing [1–576] has
been performed for a variety of patients, but without
* Correspondence: frybicki@toh.ca evidence-based appropriateness guidelines. For many
†
Leonid Chepelev, Nicole Wake, Justin Ryan, Waleed Althobaity, Ashish body parts, this document includes a comprehensive as-
Gupta, Elsa Arribas and Lumarie Santiago contributed equally to this work.
1
Department of Radiology and The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, sessment of appropriateness from the medical literature,
University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada supplemented by expert opinion (SIG members) when
Full list of author information is available at the end of the article
© The Author(s). 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and
reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to
the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
Chepelev et al. 3D Printing in Medicine (2018) 4:11 Page 2 of 38
there is a paucity of peer-review data. After the clinical approach at scoring. Consensus among members is used
decision to use 3D printing for patient care, there are when there is a paucity of evidence.
many subsequent steps, as reviewed in prior literature Each category was led by a separate writing group,
[563, 566, 577]. These include image acquisition, image composed of a small group of experts in that domain of
segmentation (demarcation of the desired 3D anatomy), medical imaging and 3D printing. The SIG Executive
creating 3D-printable file types for each segmented part, committee, led by the Guidelines Chairperson, formed
printing, and post processing of 3D medical models. the review panel. Ratings were generated via by a vote of
This document differs from existing works, including Special Interest Group members at in-person meetings.
case reports, small and larger studies, and 3D printing The results of the ratings follow the following 1–9 for-
review articles in the literature. This is not a review art- mat (with 9 being the most appropriate):
icle; instead of reviewing the literature or providing data
regarding the clinical utility of medical 3D printing, the 1–3, red, rarely appropriate: There is a lack of a clear
RSNA SIG has assembled a group of experts to begin to benefit or experience that shows an advantage over
provide consensus recommendations on the practice of usual practice.
medical modeling and 3D printing, particularly for prac- 4–6, yellow, maybe appropriate: There may be times
tice within healthcare facilities. 3D printing of anatomical when there is an advantage, but the data is lacking, or
models within a hospital has recently become recognized the benefits have not been fully defined.
as point-of-care manufacturing. These recommendations 7–9, green, usually appropriate: Data and experience
create a foundational outline to provide practice recom- shows an advantage to 3D printing as a method to
mendations for those steps required for medical 3D print- represent and/or extend the value of data contained in
ing, including image acquisition, segmentation, printing, the medical imaging examination.
post-processing, and model verification.
The supporting evidence was obtained through struc-
tured PubMed searches, as detailed in the Appendix. In
Methods
rare circumstances, supporting literature was recom-
Consensus methodology recommendations
mended directly by the members of the committee and
The recommendations regarding medical image acquisi-
was explicitly identified outside of the structured
tion, image data preparation and manipulation, generation
PubMed search results.
of 3D printed models, quality control, communication
A subset of applications of 3D printing, including in
with referring physicians, preoperative planning using 3D
congenital heart, vascular, craniomaxillofacial, musculo-
printed models, and considerations regarding materials
skeletal, genitounirary, and breast pathologies was se-
were discussed and summarized by members of the RSNA
lected for detailed review. All final components of this
Special Interest Group for 3D Printing during several
section were vetted and approved by vote of Special
meetings, including on August 31 (Silver Spring, MD) and
Interest Group members at several face-to-face meetings
December 1, 2017 (Chicago, IL) after review of the rele-
including on August 31 (Silver Spring, MD) and Decem-
vant medical 3D printing literature [1–576] and the local
ber 1, 2017 (Chicago, IL) as well as via internal posting
clinical practice of representative members of the Special
on the SIG member intranet.
Interest Group. Relevant recommendations were further
exposed to internal online discussion and summarized by
Results
a focused taskforce. The final recommendations were
Consensus methodology recommendations
reviewed and vetted by all RSNA 3D printing SIG
Medical image acquisition
members.
The most common medical imaging modalities for 3D
printing are computed tomography (CT) and magnetic
Appropriateness consensus guideline generation resonance imaging (MRI); however, any 3D imaging data-
The Special Interest Group has initiated the quality and set including sonography (e.g., echocardiography) may be
safety scholarship to identify those clinical situations for utilized as input data for segmentation. The international
which 3D Printing is considered an appropriate, and not standard format for these imaging files is Digital Imaging
appropriate, representation of the data contained in a and Communications in Medicine (DICOM). At this time,
medical imaging examination. These documents highlight DICOM images are not routinely sent directly to a 3D
appropriateness of medical 3D printing for clinical printer for printing, so medical images are segmented and
utilization, research, scientific, and informational pur- converted to a file type that is recognized by 3D printers.
poses. This work is loosely modeled after the American Common file types include Standard Tessellation Lan-
College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria® [553, 554] guage (STL), OBJ, VRML/WRL, AMF, 3MF, and X3D.
in that the guidelines committee uses an evidence-based Once this functionality is implemented by 3D printing
vendors, picture archiving and communication system higher SNR, all else being equal, implies more trust-
(PACS) vendors, and at the point of care facility, it will worthy data for 3D printing. The CNR is the relationship
allow 3D files in the form of STLs, for example, to be of the signal intensity differences (the contrast) between
stored in a patient’s medical record. two regions, scaled to noise. High contrast between vari-
ous organs in the body is an important feature of med-
Spatial resolution and slice thickness Medical imaging ical imaging and is necessary to delineate structures for
data should have sufficient spatial resolution to accur- 3D printing. The SNR and CNR of images used for 3D
ately represent the anatomy to be modeled. The spatial printing should be comparable to, or superior to,
resolution of an imaging method refers to the smallest those for “3D visualization”, defined as the compre-
resolvable distance between two different objects or two hensive ensemble of manipulation of a volumetric
different features of the same object. Low spatial reso- data set for viewing on a 2D surface such as a com-
lution techniques will be unable to differentiate two ad- puter monitor [563].
jacent structures that are close together and have similar If the SNR and/or CNR are inconsistent, or subopti-
tissue properties. When the intent to produce a 3D mal, the risks of inaccurate segmentation must be
model is known prior to a medical imaging procedure, weighed against those of rescanning the patient. Regard-
the image acquisition should be tailored so that the anat- ing high noise data, a judgment call must be made to de-
omy in the intended 3D model can be adequately visual- termine whether the segmentation operator is capable of
ized. The optimal spatial resolution will depend on the delineating the data (e.g. in the case of a cone beam CT
anatomy being imaged. image series).
Slice thickness, which influences the spatial resolution In CT, the X-ray tube voltage may also be adjusted to
and image noise (discussed in the next section), can also be maximize the signal. A lower kV can be used to increase
optimized depending on the intended use. In general, this the enhancement of iodine contrast when building vas-
means that the smallest anatomy of interest should be cap- cular models. In addition, the raw data reconstruction
tured on multiple sequential DICOM images of a particular parameters selected may affect the appearance of specific
series. For example, if the anatomy of interest measures anatomical structures. For example, the reconstruction
3 mm, it would be desirable for this anatomy to be cap- kernel (image filter) impacts both the spatial resolution
tured on at least 3 sequential image slices; therefore, the and image noise, which must be balanced, based on the
slice thickness should be no greater than 1 mm, and prefer- application. Typically, kernel options range from “sharp”
ably smaller. If images are acquired with a large slice thick- to “smooth.” Sharpening filters increase edge sharpness
ness, stair-step boundaries may be seen in the 3D model. at a cost of increasing noise while smoothing filters re-
For CT, in combination with scan distance, consider- duce noise content in images by also decrease edge
ation may be given regarding collimation (the thickness sharpness. For models with fine structures, such as the
of the X-ray beam) and overlap. Typically, the scan dis- temporal bone, a sharp kernel is preferred; and for lar-
tance and collimation are the same; however, if the slice ger, low contrast models, a smooth kernel is more ap-
distance is smaller than the collimation, there will be an propriate. CT is considered the imaging modality of
overlap which may lead to improved results. Cone Beam choice for bone imaging and is often used to produce
CT has technical differences with conventional CT, and 3D anatomical models of hard tissue structures such as
often results in a lower patient radiation exposure and bone. In MRI, the SNR may be improved by performing
subsequently less image contrast that typical clinical CT a volume acquisition (at the expense of time), decreasing
images. Image artifacts and consistency of SNR through- noise by reducing the bandwidth, altering the echo time
out the scan can also limit studies. For MRI, voxels may or repeat time, increasing the FOV, decreasing the
be isotropic or rectangular solids and the resolution may matrix size, or increasing the slice thickness.
be different in the three dimensions. The size of the
voxel depends on the matrix size, the field of view Image artifact The sub-volume of the imaging dataset
(FOV), and the slice thickness. that will be 3D printed is defined in this document as
In some clinical scenarios, there are patients for which the printing Region of Interest (ROI). All medical images
suboptimal imaging data is available, but a separate ac- contain artifact, and image processing steps should be
quisition is contraindicated. If superior spatial resolution taken to minimize artifact. The ROI should be small
is preferred and CT data is required, that benefit should enough to enable confident segmentation for 3D print-
be weighed against the risk of delivering more radiation ing. There are cases for which medical interpretation is
to the patient. possible (see Image interpretation Section), but 3D
printing can be limited by the presence of artifact, mo-
Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) and Contrast to Noise tion, or other spatial or noise limitations in DICOM im-
Ratio (CNR) The SNR is a metric of image quality. A ages. When this is the case, we recommend that the
model be annotated with documentation of those parts SIG recommends that software used for segmentation is
of the ROI where segmentation quality may be limited. FDA cleared to produce 3D Printed models suitable for
diagnostic use, specifically using the FDA definition of
Image interpretation Medical images acquired for a diagnostic use and noting that FDA cleared software for
clinical indication should be interpreted with the inter- 3D printed models will also include machines and mate-
pretation being incorporated into the patient medical rec- rials validated for this intended use. At the time of
ord. The interpretation should include the ROI being manuscript submission, the FDA has approved one
considered for printing. Often, interpretation of the ROI complete system, consisting of software through the
incorporates 3D visualization to enable or enhance diag- printing process, for medical model production.
nosis. Examples of 3D visualization include multi-planar
reformatting, maximum intensity projections, and volume File storage and descriptors
rendering. Such interpretations are currently billable in Files stored within a repository should contain or be
the United States under CPT codes 76376 and 76377. linked to a set of corresponding descriptors, including
those pertaining to image acquisition and further im-
Image data preparation and manipulation aging processing. Descriptors should be supported by
Image segmentation standardized terminology from a consensus vocabu-
Image segmentation is necessary to create 3D printable lary; the SIG acknowledges that this vocabulary repre-
files from medical images. The segmentation process, sents a current, unmet need. If the descriptors are
which subdivides medical images into anatomical re- not within digital files, this information should be
gions, typically begins by importing a set of DICOM im- otherwise archived.
ages into dedicated image post-processing software.
Anatomical regions are selected using a combination of Reference to file manipulation and alteration
automated and semi-automated tools. Once the desired Data from medical images undergo alterations in the
ROI for 3D printing has been selected, data is interpo- design of the physical model. These changes have
lated and a surface-based 3D model which describes the been categorized into Minor and Major alterations
3D geometry of that volume is calculated. To date, the [578], with the latter generally representing changes
most common, widely used, and accepted file format for that could impact clinical care. When modifications
medical 3D printed objects is the STL file. include major changes, the operator should verify that
STL files are composed of triangular faces, and the both the digital file and 3D printed model is labeled/
number of these faces can affect anatomical accuracy of identified appropriately.
a model. Each lab should determine the appropriate
number of faces/triangles for their medical models to Generation of 3D printed model
adequately represent anatomy. Operators should be 3D printing
aware of any reduction, smoothing, or further file ma- There are many different 3D printing technologies, each
nipulation or optimization within the segmentation soft- differing in the way that the final 3D printed model is
ware when creating and exporting the STL file. created. When 3D printed models are generated from
The contours of the STL file should be routinely medical images, the resolution of the 3D printer should
checked against the source medical imaging data; typical be equal to, or superior to that of the clinical images
segmentation software packages allow the final STL to used to segment the model. Similar to the DICOM ac-
be re-imported and its contours displayed over the ori- quisition stage, it is preferable that printed layers be a
ginal DICOM images. This option can be used to verify multiplier of the smallest geometry of interest. For ex-
the surface accuracy of an anatomical model STL file. ample, if the smallest anatomical object of interest on
Additional file formats noted above should also meet the the 3D model is 1 mm, this object should be printed on
same criteria. at least 3 layers of the model. Due to the nature of med-
ical models, and the need for sub-millimeter accuracy, a
Segmentation and Computer Aided Design (CAD) software layer thickness of no more than one-third of a milli-
Medical image processing software is required to gener- meter is recommended, and preferably less than or equal
ate a file format amenable to 3D printing. The RSNA 3D to one-eighth of a millimeter. In addition to the layer
printing SIG concurs with the FDA that software that thickness of the 3D printing hardware, the in-plane (x-y)
has been favorably evaluated by the FDA be used to resolution should be known, with a target of less than
translate medical images into formats amenable to 3D one-quarter of a millimeter. The values above are global
printing for all aspects of patient care, defined by the recommendations may not be applicable in all cases. If a
SIG as all interactions with healthcare professionals, or model requires a higher or lower accuracy, these param-
patients and their families, related to medical care. The eters should be modified accordingly.
The medical model should include a patient identifier inaccuracies. Some examples of quantitative inspections
or an internal unique identification number that can be could include measurements of a test specimen, mea-
tracked back to the patient and date of the image acqui- surements of the model, or scanning and comparing the
sition. Labels can be incorporated (3D printed) into the model back to the original DICOM data sets.
model itself. Labels should be externally attached to the
model if size or location does not allow for printed label- The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
ing. Printed models are assumed to be of anatomic size The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) en-
(1:1) unless a scaling factor is otherwise noted. Add- sures the safety and efficacy of personalized devices
itional identifiers such as model sidedness (left, right) in the United States of America. 3D Printing falls
should be noted, as appropriate. Institutional guidelines under the auspices of The Center for Devices and
should be used to verify models are free of protected Radiological Health (CDRH). There have been four
health information, or models are handled appropriately FDA benchmarks related to 3D printing and medical
in accordance to Health Insurance Portability and Ac- devices from 2014 to 2018.
countability Act (HIPAA) guidelines. First, in October 2014, the FDA held a public work-
shop entitled “Additive Manufacturing of Medical De-
Post-processing printed models vices: An Interactive Discussion on the Technical
Post-processing steps should not alter the intended Considerations of 3D Printing”. Second, the FDA pub-
morphology and desired accuracy of the part, but in- lished “Additively Manufactured Medical Products –
stead should only enhance the utility (including clarity The FDA Perspective” [579]. Third, in December 2017,
and transparency) and/or durability of the model. It the FDA published “Technical Considerations for Addi-
should be noted that finishing may slightly alter the di- tive Manufactured Devices” [580]. This perspective in-
mensional accuracy of a part, but this variation should cluded insights regarding 3D printing data manipulation
be minimal (or within the desired global accuracy of the and hardware for modeling patient-specific anatomy.
part) and the benefits (for example: strength and clarity) Fourth, the FDA commented on the publication “Main-
should outweigh the dimensional change. All support taining Safety and Efficacy for 3D Printing in Medicine”
materials and residual manufacturing materials and/or [578]. This paper uses a similar, logical 3-step format of
substances should be removed as completely as possible. these consensus recommendations, and then develops
If all supporting material is not capable of being re- different suggestions for regulatory models that depend
moved, this should be noted and presented to the on how much, if at all, the anatomical data is modified
requesting provider. Should the model be damaged ei- before 3D printing. On August 31st, 2017, the RSNA
ther during or after post-processing and cleaning, repairs SIG and the FDA engaged in a joint meeting to discuss
should be performed in a manner that reconstitutes the 3D printed anatomic models. The intended output of
quality to which the original model adhered. If these re- this meeting is a co-published white paper that will form
pairs are not possible, the model should be reprinted. Any the next benchmark.
damage should be noted to the provider and the option to
reprint should be presented. Cleaning solution concentra- Quality control program
tion and saturation levels should be monitored and main- Due to environmental factors and material properties,
tained in accordance to manufacture recommendations. model morphology is expected to change over time. As
part of a complete quality control program, 3D printers
Model inspection should undergo regular accuracy testing, including test
The model should be inspected by the 3D printing la- prints, preventative maintenance, and recalibration [581,
boratory before clinical use. For cases where the model 582]. Laboratories may develop a process using a
may be limited by a known image artifact, the model will phantom to ensure regular quality standards for their
be noted with any areas of concern. Qualitative and/or printers. If the reference standard is known or assumed,
quantitative measures to confirm that the 3D printed mathematical operations [583] can be applied equally to
model matches the desired input data will be taken, in- those volumes in the ROI to determine the overall ac-
cluding but not limited to expert subjective assessment curacy of the model, including not only potential manual
and objective fitting to the original volume submitted errors from segmentation, but also generation of the
for printing. This can be done on a per part basis, per final data set including digital post-processing steps such
build basis, or in accordance with an additional internal as smoothing.
protocol of the 3D lab. Some examples of qualitative as-
sessments could include comparing the model to a Delivery and discussion with referring physicians
digital representation or printed picture of the model 3D printed models represent an advanced form of com-
and inspecting the model for printing imperfections or munication of the data in medical images, and may
include the summation of data from multiple sources. peer-review data, to define and support the use of 3D
Extensive multidisciplinary teaching opportunities for printing for patients with a variety of conditions, in-
3D printing have been realized [584–586]. Physicians cluding congenital heart, vascular, craniomaxillofacial,
should have an opportunity to discuss the salient fea- musculoskeletal, genitounirary, and breast pathologies
tures and intended use of all models. Any concerns (Table 1).
about the model or segmentation process, if not dis-
cussed previously, should be noted to the provider at the Discussion
time of delivery. Where possible, annotations detailing Reviews that include the types of 3D printers commonly
critical points of model anatomy should be stored both used in medicine have been published [563, 584]. Re-
within the digital record of the model, and physically garding image post-processing and software, several tu-
placed on the 3D printed model. One example is annota- torials are available for step-by-step training. The
tion of a subtle fracture that may not otherwise be following discussion includes the specific descriptions
represented in either or both, the segmented, or the 3D from the SIG writing group for each clinical group of
printed model. clinical scenarios considered for appropriateness.
Pre-operative planning Congenital heart disease

“Pre-operative planning” with 3D printing refers to vir- Congenital heart diseases (CHD) are the most common
tual surgical planning (also called digital templating, significant birth defects. Substantial literature supports
digital surgical planning, virtual planning, computerized the benefit of 3D printing for patients with congenital
planning, computer-assisted surgical simulation). This heart disease [1–7]. Regarding improved outcomes, pre-
detailed planning of the intervention occurs in the cise preoperative understanding of the complex anatomy
digital space. There are times when the simulation itself from a printed model may obviate or shorten lengthy ex-
is the end product, and the interventionist acquires valu- ploration, and therefore operation and cardiopulmonary
able information regarding patient anatomy and medical bypass time can be reduced.
devices to be used to increase confidence and knowledge These recommendations utilize and conform to the
before surgery. For these cases the digital plan is trans- CHD nomenclature defined by the European Association
ferred to patient care by way of 3D printed templates, for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery / Society of Thoracic Sur-
guides, or models. This type of planning usually involves gery (EACTS-STS) version of the International Pediatric
major changes to the digital model while utilizing ori- and Congenital Cardiac Code (IPCCC), except as where
ginal patient contours. This necessitates the systematic noted otherwise. The clinical scenarios defined by the
application of the 3D printing recommendations out- IPCCC include the following: Septal Defects, Pulmonary
lined above to the models used for virtual surgical plan- Venous Anomalies, Cor Triatriatum, Pulmonary Venous
ning as a minimum requirement. Stenosis, Right Heart Lesions, Left Heart Lesions, Single
Ventricle, Transposition of the Great Arteries, DORV,
Material biocompatibility, cleaning, and sterilization DOLV.
For anatomical models and surgical guides/templates/ Structured searches were performed using the US Na-
jigs potentially entering a surgical field, material biocom- tional Library of Medicine (PubMed), which enabled the
patibility, cleaning, and sterilization are vitally important. querying and retrieval of appropriate clinical documents
The details are beyond the scope of this document. supporting the appropriateness of 3D printing-enabled
However, biocompatibility of materials depends on sev- technologies for each specific diagnosis. The search re-
eral factors including base material, the 3D printing sults were reviewed by experts and some references were
process (and any variations), any post-processing tech- removed and some were relocated to different categor-
niques, and hospital cleaning and sterilization methods ies. As noted above, references outside of the structured
and requirements. Manufacturers should provide clean- searches were added but noted and approved by the
ing recommendations and specifications for materials writing group. As a general rule, the benefits of 3D
which have been formally tested for biocompatibility and printing to define and rehearse an intervention increase
sterility, and these specifications should be followed by with the overall degree of complexity of disease.
the facility. Additional internal sterilization policies may
exist depending on the hospital. Craniomaxillofacial pathologies
The International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision
Appropriateness of 3D printing (anatomic modeling) for (ICD-10) [555] descriptions and categorization were used
selected clinical scenarios to categorize the clinical scenarios for rating craniomaxillo-
This section provides evidence-based guidelines, supple- facial conditions. Four major groups were used as the start-
mented by expert opinion when there is a paucity of ing point; 1) Craniomaxillofacial Trauma, 2) Congenital
Table 1 Ratings Summary: Appropriateness Guidelines (scoring system defined in Methods) for patients who present with a variety
of medical conditions, and for whom 3D Printing is often considered
Table 1 Ratings Summary: Appropriateness Guidelines (scoring system defined in Methods) for patients who present with a variety
of medical conditions, and for whom 3D Printing is often considered (Continued)
Malformations, 3) Acquired/Developmental Deformities planning combined with patient-matched implants or

and 4) Neoplasms. Further sub-groups were formed under- templating is playing.
neath the major groupings. Additional clarification for
“simple” versus “complex” diagnoses within a particular Genitourinary pathologies
group was given based on inherent differences in appropri- The genitourinary conditions have been organized ana-
ateness ratings between subgroups of patients in these tomically, recognizing that common genitourinary inter-
groups. Further language describing each diagnostic group- ventions are largely based on anatomic considerations.
ing helps describe the difference between a simple and a The complication rate after major genitourinary surger-
complex case in each subcategory. ies is reflected in the complexity of the lesion. For
Structured searches were performed using the US example, more complex kidney tumors are associated
National Library of Medicine (PubMed), which en- with longer operative times, warm ischemia times, and
abled the querying and retrieval of appropriate clinical greater blood loss [559]. High kidney tumor complexity
documents supporting the appropriateness of 3D can also be correlated to the risk of major postoperative
printing-enabled technologies for a specific condition. complications requiring a secondary intervention [560].
The search results were reviewed by experts and There is a growing body of literature that supports the
some references were removed because they were not benefits to patients from 3D printed models. Specifically,
relevant. A small number of references were added 3D printed models may improve comprehension of anat-
because they were found to be relevant, but not omy and facilitate pre-surgical planning for complex sur-
appearing using the stated search string. As noted gical cases, ultimately reducing operation times and
above, these were vetted by the writing group before improving patient outcomes.
inclusion. Clinical scenarios that were only dental or This document describes and provides rating for the
only brain have not been included. The authors clinical scenarios related to 3D printing of genitourinary
recognize that these include many important clinical pathology [561, 562]. Structured searches were per-
scenarios of for 3D printing, and the goal is to informed using the US National Library of Medicine
clude them in upcoming documents. (PubMed), which enabled the querying and retrieval of
Craniomaxillofacial (CMF) conditions for the purposes appropriated clinical documents supporting the appro-
of this document encompass several different surgical priateness of 3D printing for a specific diagnosis. As a
specialties all working in the head and neck area with general rule, the benefits of 3D printing to define and re-
both pediatric and adult patients. These include oral and hearse a genitourinary intervention increases with the
maxillofacial surgery, craniofacial surgery, plastic sur- overall degree of complexity of the pathology that is rep-
gery, microvascular surgery, pediatric neurosurgery and resented by the physical model based on a medical im-
otolaryngology. Use of 3D printing-enabled technologies aging study performed in a radiology department.
to aid clinical care in the craniomaxillofacial area has
been seen from the very advent of 3D printing in the late Musculoskeletal pathologies
1980s [556, 557]. Even before the commercialization of The role of 3D printed models in addressing musculo-
stereolithography there were surgeons, engineers and re- skeletal pathologies can vary depending on a specific
searchers figuring out more manual ways of converting clinical scenario, ranging from aiding in informed con-
medical imaging datasets into 3D models [558]. The fit sent to use in preoperative planning. Custom fixation
seems clear, CMF surgery has both a functional compo- plates, surgical osteotomy guides and implants can also
nent, and for most cases an aesthetic component, where be generated from 3D data, allowing for virtual surgery
the form carries importance along with the functional and design of a custom implant that is modeled after the
restoration. In the CMF arena, the use of anatomical contralateral healthy side. In addition, mock surgeries
models of anatomy is primarily derived from CT and can be performed on the physical 3D models, allowing
MRI datasets, and also from an increasing volume of for more intuitive problem solving and measurements
cone beam CT datasets. Patient-specific anatomical preoperatively. Such planning alters surgical manage-
models are the baseline, but for many of these applica- ment for some patients, either by delaying intervention,
tions the value of these technologies has been found in or by suggesting an alternative approach. Pre-surgical
either, a) patient-matched implants (for instance tem- planning can also decrease operating room time and the
poromandibular joint reconstruction), or b) virtual sur- number of devices and tools that need to be tried and
gery combined with templates and guides (for instance subsequently wasted and/or re-sterilized. In this sense,
orthognathic surgery). The scenarios to follow were 3D printing has proven useful for demonstrating muscu-
thought of in this way, with some of them relying heavily loskeletal pathology and for planning interventions.
on anatomical models alone and some of them relying Based on the accumulating evidence, the use of 3D
with increasing importance on the role that digital printed models can positively impact numerous metrics
associated with musculoskeletal interventions, including patient specific 3D model for suitability before being de-
patient and physician satisfaction, operative time, blood ployed in patients.
loss, and the various direct and indirect costs associated Aortic surgeries, especially in the region of aortic arch
with patient-centered decision making regarding man- and upper abdominal aorta can be quite challenging due
agement of complex disease. At present, the musculo- to origin of branches, angulation and complex aneurysm
skeletal pathologies with potential and established 3D neck anatomy. 3D printed models have shown to im-
printing-enabled management have been broadly catego- prove surgeons’ understanding of anatomy and help pre-
rized into fractures, chronic osseous abnormalities, de- operative planning [485]. Further, 3D printed models
generative disorders, neoplastic pathologies, scoliosis, can potentially also be used to plan and simulate surgical
and miscellaneous specific applications including liga- and endovascular interventions on visceral aneurysms
mentous injury and heterotopic ossification. [502, 503]. These models can also be used for designing
[486] and testing [568, 576] endovascular devices like
Vascular pathologies catheters, coils, balloons, and stents.
3D printing has been shown to be useful for understand-
ing the vascular anatomy, evaluation of hemodynamics,
Breast pathologies
treatment planning (surgical and endovascular) as well
Breast cancer is the most common solid malignancy in
as preclinical testing of devices. It has also been used for
women in the United States [570]. The overall lifetime
medical education and procedural training on vascular
risk of developing breast cancer for women in the
models [563–566]. There are several clinical scenarios
United States is 12.4%. Advancements in diagnostic tests
for which 3D printing has been used in the care of pa-
and treatments have led to decreasing death rates of
tients with vascular disease. Because of the nature of
1.8% per year from 2005 to 2014 [570, 571]. Understand-
vascular pathology, dissection, aneurysm, and stenosis
ing the extent of disease at the time of diagnosis allows
are often treated with medical management and “watch-
appropriate staging and determination of prognosis and
ful waiting”; most patients follow this algorithm, and
survival, in addition to selection of suitable surgical op-
there is little to no role for 3D printing. However, some
tions [572]. Benefits from 3D printed models and its role
patients have a clinical presentation and non-invasive
as an aid to clinical care has been increasingly described
tests that warrant intervention, while others progress
in the literature. 3D printed models have the ability of
from watchful waiting to planned intervention. For many
depicting the extent of disease and relationships of sensi-
of these patients, 3D printing is appropriate. Of note,
tive anatomy, thereby possibly reducing operating time,
coronary 3D printing, and cardiac printing in general
enhancing utilization of new oncoplastic techniques, and
falls outside the scope of this document. These clinical
improving patient outcomes.
scenarios will be discussed in future documents.
Benign breast diseases are common and include a wide
Most aortic dissections are treated medically, and for
range of entities [573]. The most common of these en-
these patients there is no indication for 3D printing.
tities, fibrocystic change, is clinically observed in up to
However, 3D printing may be appropriate for planning
50% of women and found histologically in 90% of
intervention in complex dissections, and in particular
women [573]. Fibroadenomas are the next most com-
dissections that also have enlargement. Models have
mon benign breast disease occurring in 15–23% of
been used for planning and simulation of stent deploy-
women [574]. Surgical management of these entities
ment [495]. Simulation on models can help in identify-
may be needed in cases where cosmesis is altered or
ing the best projections for angiography, best catheter
when symptom relief is needed. Surgical management
and wire combinations to navigate the anatomy, in for
may impact developing breast tissue in young women
determining appropriate balloon and stent size as well as
leading to alterations in its proper development [575].
position.
Therefore, careful understanding of the anatomy may
Endovascular repair of complex aortic aneurysm in-
minimize the deleterious effects of surgery in benign
volving the origin of branches, extreme angulations,
breast disease.
complex neck anatomy, and short landing zones can be
quite challenging. Use of 3D printed models can aid un-
derstanding of complex anatomy, device selection, and Conclusions
design of prosthesis best suited for patient’s anatomy. 3D printing will play an increasingly important role in en-
These models have shown to be useful in planning pro- abling precision medicine. This document addresses the
cedures and increase operator confidence [491]. 3D clinical scenarios where pathology complexity necessitates
printed models have also been used to precisely place a transformation of clinical imaging data into a physical
fenestrations on stent grafts to treat complex aneurysms model. Adoption of common clinical standards regarding
[479, 567]. In addition, graft replicas can be tested on appropriate use, information and material management,
and quality control are needed to ensure the greatest pos- PubMed search: ((3D printing) AND truncus) OR
sible clinical benefit from3D printing. ((rapid prototyping) AND truncus)
This work provides the first comprehensive Results: None
literature-based guideline document regarding the im- Partial Anomalous Pulmonary Venous Connection
plementation of 3D printing in clinical practice and de- (PAPVR)
tails the appropriate scenarios for numerous clinical PubMed search: ((3D printing) AND (Anomalous pul-
applications of 3D printing. It is anticipated that this monary)) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND (Anomalous
consensus guideline document, created by the members pulmonary)) OR ((3D printing) AND TAPVR) OR
of the RSNA 3D printing special group, will provide the ((rapid prototyping) AND TAPVR) OR ((3D printing)
initial reference for method and clinical application AND PAPVR) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND PAPVR)
standardization. The document and will be substantially Results: None
expanded and refined, based on expanding clinical Total Anomalous Pulmonary Venous Connection
applications. (TAPVR)
PubMed search: ((3D printing) AND (Anomalous pul-
monary)) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND (Anomalous
Appendix pulmonary)) OR ((3D printing) AND TAPVR) OR
Search Methodology and Search Results ((rapid prototyping) AND TAPVR) OR ((3D printing)
Structured searches were performed using the US Na- AND PAPVR) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND PAPVR)
tional Library of Medicine (PubMed), which enabled the Results: None
querying and retrieval of appropriated clinical docu- Cor Triatriatum
ments regarding the appropriateness of 3D printing in PubMed search: ((3D printing) AND (Cor Triatria-
each of the scenarios. tum)) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND (Cor Triatriatum))
Congenital Heart Disease (Retrieved August 2017) Results: None
Atrial Septal Defect (ASD): Large; small or spontan- Pulmonary Venous Stenosis
eously closed PubMed search: ((3D printing) AND (pulmonary ven-
PubMed Search: ((3D printing) AND (ASD)) OR ous stenosis)) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND ((pulmonary
((rapid prototyping) AND (ASD)) OR ((3D printing) venous stenosis)) OR ((3D printing) AND (pulmonary
AND (atrial septal defect)) OR ((rapid prototyping) vein stenosis)) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND ((pulmon-
AND (atrial septal defect)) ary vein stenosis))
Results: [1–7] Results: None
Ventricular Septal Defect (VSD): complex; large Tetralogy of Fallot (TOF): NOS; accompanied with
(noncomplex); small major aortopulmonary collateral arteries
PubMed Search: ((3D printing) AND (VSD)) OR PubMed search: ((3D printing) AND TOF) OR ((rapid
((rapid prototyping) AND (VSD)) OR ((3D printing) prototyping) AND TOF) OR ((3D printing) AND tetral-
AND (ventricular septal defect)) OR ((rapid prototyping) ogy) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND tetralogy)
AND (ventricular septal defect)) Results: [11, 17] Outside of Search, suggested by SIG
Results: [8–16] Members: [18]
Atrioventricular Canal (AV Canal) Tricuspid Valve Disease and Ebstein’s Anomaly
PubMed Search: ((3D printing) AND (AVSD)) OR PubMed search: ((3D printing) AND ebstein) OR ((rapid
((rapid prototyping) AND (AVSD)) OR ((3D printing) prototyping) AND ebstein) OR ((3D printing) AND
AND (atrioventricular septal defect)) OR ((rapid proto- ebsteins) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND ebsteins) OR ((3D
typing) AND (atrioventricular septal defect)) OR ((3D printing) AND ebstein’s) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND
printing) AND (AV Canal)) OR ((rapid prototyping) ebstein’s) OR ((3D printing) AND (tricuspid valve disease))
AND (AV Canal)) OR ((3D printing) AND (atrioven- OR ((rapid prototyping) AND (tricuspid valve disease))
tricular canal)) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND (atrioven- Results: None
tricular canal)) RVOT Obstruction and/or Pulmonary Stenosis
Results: None PubMed search: ((3D printing) AND (RVOT obstruc-
Aortopulmonary window (AP Window) tion)) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND (RVOT obstruc-
PubMed Search: ((3D printing) AND (AP window)) tion)) OR ((3D printing) AND (pulmonary stenosis)) OR
OR ((rapid prototyping) AND (AP Window)) OR ((3D ((rapid prototyping) AND (pulmonary stenosis))
printing) AND (aortopulmonary window)) OR ((rapid Results: [12, 16]
prototyping) AND (aortopulmonary window)) Hypoplastic Left Heart Syndrome
Results: None PubMed search: ((3D printing) AND HLHS) OR
Truncus Arteriosus ((rapid prototyping) AND HLHS) OR ((3D printing)
AND (hypoplastic left)) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND Results: [23, 28]

(hypoplastic left)) Transposition of the Great Arteries (dextro-TGA)
Results: [9–11, 19–24] PubMed search: ((3D printing) AND (D-TGA)) OR
Shone’s Syndrome ((rapid prototyping) AND (D-TGA)) OR ((3D printing)
PubMed search: ((3D printing) AND shones) OR AND DTGA) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND DTGA) OR
((rapid prototyping) AND shones) OR ((3D printing) ((3D printing) AND (dextro-transposition)) OR ((rapid
AND shone’s) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND shone’s) prototyping) AND (dextro-transposition)) OR ((3D
Results: None printing) AND (d-transposition)) OR ((rapid prototyp-
Double Inlet Left Ventricle ing) AND (d-transposition))
PubMed search: ((3D printing) AND DILV) OR ((rapid Results: [29]
prototyping) AND DILV) OR ((3D printing) AND Double Outlet Right Ventricle
(double inlet left)) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND (double PubMed search: ((3D printing) AND DORV) OR
inlet left)) ((rapid prototyping) AND DORV) OR ((3D printing)
Results: None AND (double outlet)) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND
Double Inlet Right Ventricle (double outlet))
PubMed search: ((3D printing) AND DIRV) OR Results: [9–12, 19, 20, 23, 24, 30]
((rapid prototyping) AND DIRV) OR ((3D printing) Double Outlet Left Ventricle
AND (double inlet right)) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND PubMed search: ((3D printing) AND DOLV) OR
(double inlet right)) ((rapid prototyping) AND DOLV) OR ((3D printing)
Results: None AND (double outlet left)) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND
Mitral atresia (double outlet left))
PubMed search: ((3D printing) AND (mitral atresia)) Results: None
OR ((rapid prototyping) AND (mitral atresia)) Craniomaxillofacial (Retrieved August 2017)
Results: None Skull Fractures: Fractures of the cranium include the
Tricuspid atresia frontal bone, frontal sinus, parietal, sphenoid, temporal,
PubMed search: ((3D printing) AND (tricuspid atre- occipital and mastoid bone. Simple fractures would be
sia)) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND (tricuspid atresia)) non-displaced and may not need surgery. Complex frac-
Results: None tures may be comminuted and most likely require sur-
Unbalanced AV canal gery early for decompression and/or later for cranial
PubMed search: ((3D printing) AND unbalanced) OR reconstruction. Any violation of the dura or brain re-
((rapid prototyping) AND unbalanced) quires immediate surgery. ICD-10: S02.0 Fracture of
Results: None Vault of Skull, S02.1 Fracture of Base of Skull
Single ventricle (general) PubMed Search: ((3D Printing) AND (Skull Fracture))
PubMed search: ((3D printing) AND SV) OR ((rapid OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Skull Fracture))
prototyping) AND SV) OR ((3D printing) AND (single ven- Results: [31–43]
tricle)) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND (single ventricle)) Facial Fractures: Description: Facial fractures include
Results: [25–27] fractures of the maxilla, zygoma, nasal bones, and frontal
Congenitally Corrected TGA (levo-TGA) bone in addition to the orbit, which is composed of the
PubMed search: ((3D printing) AND (L-TGA)) OR orbital surface of the maxillary bone, lamina papyracea
((rapid prototyping) AND (L-TGA)) OR ((3D printing) of the ethmoid bone, lacrimal bone, greater and lesser
AND LTGA) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND LTGA) OR wings of the sphenoid bone, orbital process of the zygo-
((3D printing) AND (levo-transposition)) OR ((rapid matic bone, the orbital process of the palatine bone, and
prototyping) AND (levo-transposition)) OR ((3D print- the pars orbitalis of the frontal bone. Non-displaced
ing) AND (l-transposition)) OR ((rapid prototyping) fractures often heal uneventfully and may be managed
AND (l-transposition)) OR ((3D printing) AND CCTG non-surgically. Displaced fractures---either linear or
A) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND CCTGA) OR ((3D comminuted---generally require operative repair to
printing) AND (CC-TGA)) OR ((rapid prototyping) avoid functional or esthetic complications. High energy
AND (CC-TGA)) OR ((3D printing) AND (congenitally injuries, such as those seen with unrestrained motor ve-
corrected transposition)) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND hicle collisions or gunshot wounds, often result in
(congenitally corrected transposition)) OR ((3D printing) greater three-dimensional disruption and displacement
AND (congenitally corrected transposition)) OR ((rapid than low energy injuries, which are often the result of
prototyping) AND (congenitally corrected transpos- assaults and ground level falls. Patient-matched implants
ition)) OR ((3D printing) AND (CC-transposition)) OR may be required for reconstruction of complex injuries,
((rapid prototyping) AND (CC-transposition)) particularly those involving the orbit and zygoma.
ICD-10: S02.2 Fracture of Nasal Bones, S02.3 Fracture of Printing) AND (Hypertelorism)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping)
Orbital Floor, S02.4 Fracture of Malar, Maxillary and AND (Hypertelorism)) OR ((3D Printing) AND (Plagioce-
Zygoma Bones phaly)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Plagiocephaly)) OR
PubMed Search: ((3D Printing) AND (Facial Fracture)) ((3D Printing) AND (Facial Asymmetry)) OR ((Rapid
OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Facial Fracture)) Prototyping) AND (Facial Asymmetry))
Results: [31–43] Results: [32, 33, 53, 60, 88–122]
Mandible Fractures: Mandible fractures include frac- Cleft Lip & Palate: Cleft lip and cleft palate are birth
tures to the condyle, ramus, coronoid process, mandibu- defects that affect the upper lip, nose, alveolus, soft and
lar angle, body of the mandible or symphysis. Linear or hard palate. The problem can range from a small
fractures are likely to be less three-dimensional as com- notch in the lip (simple) to a unilateral or bilateral
pared to comminuted fractures, which are often signifi- complete or incomplete involvement of lip, alveolar
cantly displaced. Depending on the complexity of the bone, soft and hard palate with displacement of the pal-
fracture, the degree of dislocation and the location, open atal muscles. The functional problems associated with
reduction and internal fixation with titanium plates and cleft lip and/or palate include problems with eating,
screws may be required. Secondary reconstruction of speech, and eustachian tube malfunction and middle ear
complex post-traumatic deformity may also require effusion requiring grommet tube insertion into the ear
patient-matched implants. ICD-10: S02.6 Fracture of drum. Growth may be abnormal requiring jaw surgery.
Mandible (body), S02.61 Fracture of Condylar Process of Surgery involves alveolar bone grafting, lip and nose re-
Mandible, S02.62 Fracture of Subcondylar Process of pair, palate repair including palatal muscle repair and
Mandible, S02.63 Fracture of Coronoid Process of Man- closure of the palatal cleft. Later secondary surgery may
dible, S02.64 Fracture of Ramus of Mandible, S02.65 be necessary. ICD-10: Q35.1 Cleft Hard Palate, Q35.3
Fracture of Angle of Mandible, S02.66 Fracture of Sym- Cleft Soft Palate, Q35.5 Cleft Hard Palate and Cleft Soft
physis of Mandible Palate, Q36.0 Cleft Lip, Bilateral, Q36.1 Cleft Lip, Me-
PubMed Search: ((3D Printing) AND (Mandible Frac- dian, Q36.9 Cleft Lip, Unilateral
ture)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Mandible Fracture)) PubMed Search: ((3D Printing) AND (Cleft Palate))
Results: [32, 35–37, 44–69] OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Cleft Palate)) OR ((3D
Congenital Malformations of Skull & Facial Bones: Printing) AND (Cleft Lip)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping)
Syndromal or non-syndromal cases characterized mainly by AND (Cleft Lip))
anomalies which may vary from mild to severe and may Results: [123–135]
present with asymmetric involvement of the skull and facial Ear Malformations: Malformations of the ear can in-
bones. In simple craniosynostosis one or more sutures may clude missing portions of the ear, misshapen portions of
be involved. In complex or syndromal craniosynostosis pa- the ear, malpositioned ears, large ears (macrotia) or
tients may be programmed genetically to grow abnormally small/missing ears (microtia). Simple cases may require
and require repeated surgical operations until growth is surgical excision of extra tissue or a procedure to restrict
complete including cranial vault, facial-orbital advancement prominence. Complex cases are typically very complex
including maxillae and mandible surgery after eruption of surgical cases and may require total auricular recon-
the secondary dentition. Congenital birth defects character- struction with autogenous tissues. ICD-10: Q17.1
ized by incomplete development or absence of face struc- Macrotia, Q17.2 Microtia
tures, usually affecting one side of the face. Simple cases PubMed Search: ((3D Printing) AND (Microtia)) OR
would include those such as positional plagiocephaly which ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Microtia)) OR ((3D Print-
most likely involve non-surgical treatment. Complex cases ing) AND (Macrotia)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND
for facial reconstruction (for craniofacial macrosomia or (Macrotia))
hypertelorism, for instance) or total vault reconstruction in Results: [136–146]
an infant require extensive planning and surgical care. Osteochondroplasias: Osteogenesis imperfecta (OI) is
Secondary reconstruction in the growing child or adult a genetic disorder in which bones break easily. Fibrous
may require continued surgical care as the skeleton de- Dysplasia of the craniomaxillofacial skeleton may result
velops further before reaching skeletal maturity. ICD-10: in benign overgrowth of tissue which is fibrous and lack-
Q75.0 Craniosynostosis, Q75.1 Craniofacial Dysostosis, ing calcium. Fibrous dysplasia may impact skeletal ap-
Q75.2 Hypertelorism, Q75.3 Macrocephaly, Q75.4 pearance but the complex cases begin to compromise
Mandibulofacial Dysostosis, Q75.5 Oculomandibular other vital structures/organs such as the optic nerve and
Dysostosis, Q67.0 Congenital Facial Asymmetry, Q67.3 the brain. Simple cases of OI may include bony fractures
Plagiocephaly which will be handled such as in the Trauma (Group A,
PubMed Search: ((3D Printing) AND (craniosynostosis)) II or III classification). Complex fibrous dysplasia cases
OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (craniosynostosis)) OR ((3D can be very difficult surgically and require three-
dimensional removal/sculpting of the mass while paying simple excision. Complicated and destructive lesions
close attention to close-by vital structures. Surgical re- may involve segmental resection of the mandible or
placement of tumor resection can be very complex. maxilla and reconstruction, typically with autogenous
ICD-10: Q78.0 Osteogenesis Imperfecta, Q78.1 Polyos- tissues supported by rigid fixation. Secondary recon-
totic Fibrous Dysplasia struction with patient-matched implants or further free
PubMed Search: ((3D Printing) AND (Osteogenesis flaps may be required for complex cases. ICD-10: M27.1
Imperfecta)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Osteogenesis Giant Cell Granuloma, Central, M27.2 Inflammatory
Imperfecta)) OR ((3D Printing) AND (Fibrous Dysplasia)) Conditions of Jaws (osteoradionecrosis, osteomyelitis,
OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Fibrous Dysplasia)) others), M27.3 Alveolitis of Jaws
Results: [53, 147–156] PubMed Search: ((3D Printing) AND (Giant Cell
Dentofacial Anomalies Including Malocclusion: Granuloma Jaw)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Giant
Dentofacial anomalies can include over or undergrowth Cell Granuloma Jaw)) OR ((3D Printing) AND (Osteora-
of either the upper jaw (maxilla) or the lower jaw (man- dionecrosis)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Osteora-
dible). Malocclusion happens when the teeth are not ap- dionecrosis)) OR ((3D Printing) AND (Osteomyelitis))
proximating in a way that allows for normal function OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Osteomyelitis)) OR ((3D
and can be any combination of one jaw being smaller, Printing) AND (Alveolitis)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping)
larger or asymmetric as compared to the other. Simple AND (Alveolitis))
cases may involve surgical repositioning of only one of Results: [150, 202–207]
the jaws and typically symmetrical movements. Complex Temporomandibular Joint Disorders: Temporoman-
cases typically involve bimaxillary surgery with highly dibular joint disorders relate to a variety of conditions
complex movements of both jaws based upon the clin- affecting the anatomic and functional characteristics of
ical and radiographic examination. ICD-10: M26.01 the temporomandibular joint. Factors contributing to
Maxillary hyperplasia, M26.02 Maxillary hypoplasia, the complexity of temporomandibular diseases are its re-
M26.03 Mandibular hyperplasia, M26.04 Mandibular hy- lation to dentition and mastication and the symptomatic
poplasia, M26.05 Macrogenia, M26.06 Microgenia, effects in other areas which account for referred pain to
M26.07 Excessive tuberosity of jaw, M26.1 Anomalies of the joint. Common diseases are developmental abnor-
Jaw-Cranial Base Relationship, M26.11 Maxillary asym- malities, trauma, subluxation, luxation, arthritis, and
metry, M26.211 Malocclusion Angle Class I, M26.212 neoplasia. Simple cases may not need surgical interven-
Malocclusion Angle Class II, M26.213 Malocclusion tion or may require arthroscopy. Cases that involve loss
Angle Class III, M26.22 Open Occlusal Relationship, or gain of vertical dimension in the condyle and result
M26.220 Open Anterior Occlusal Relationship, M26.221 in loss of jaw function (malocclusion or range of mo-
Open Posterior Occlusal Relationship tion) may require joint total joint replacement and will
PubMed Search: ((3D Printing) AND (Orthognathic often rely on patient-matched implants for reconstruc-
Surgery)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Orthognathic tion of the joint(s). Complex conditions such as
Surgery)) OR ((3D Printing) AND (Maxillary Hyperpla- ankylosis of the joint require careful surgical interven-
sia)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Maxillary Hyperpla- tion to avoid surrounding vital structures such as nerves
sia)) OR ((3D Printing) AND (Maxillary Asymmetry)) and vasculature. ICD-10: M26.601 Right temporoman-
OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Maxillary Asymmetry)) dibular joint disorder, unspecified, M26.602 Left tem-
OR ((3D Printing) AND (Malocclusion)) OR ((Rapid poromandibular joint disorder, unspecified, M26.603
Prototyping) AND (Malocclusion)) OR ((3D Printing) Bilateral temporomandibular joint disorder, unspecified
AND (Anterior Open Bite)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping) PubMed Search: ((3D Printing) AND (Temporoman-
AND (Anterior Open Bite)) OR ((3D Printing) AND dibular Joint)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Temporo-
(Posterior Open Bite)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND mandibular Joint)) OR ((Stereolithography) AND
(posterior open bite)) OR ((3D Printing) AND (virtual (Temporomandibular Joint)) OR ((CAD-CAM) and
surgical planning)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (vir- (Temporomandibular Joint))
tual surgical planning)) Results: [32, 36, 208–243]
Results: [36, 53, 79, 81, 92, 93, 98, 99, 101–103, 107, Benign Neoplasms (Bone): Bony benign neoplasms of
108, 110, 117, 120, 123, 157–201] the craniomaxillofacial area may involve the skull, max-
Other Diseases of Jaws: Other diseases of jaws in- illa, orbit, sinuses and mandible. These can range from
clude inflammatory, infectious, vascular or iatrogenic simple cases where excision of a mass may be required
processes in which bone is remodeled or eroded, such as to very complex cases requiring three-dimensional surgi-
osteoradionecrosis and osteomyelitis. Bony lesions such cal excision and reconstruction. Reconstruction for com-
as giant cell lesions and benign cysts may require partial plex cases may require autogenous tissue or a free flap
resection of the jaw. Uncomplicated cases may require and may at times also require patient-matched implants
or fixation plates. ICD-10: D16.4 Benign neoplasm of the area to be resected/reconstructed, the three-dimen-
bones of skull and face, D16.5 Benign neoplasm of lower sionality of the affected area or its approximation to vital
jaw bone structures. Reconstruction for complex cases most times
PubMed Search: ((3D Printing) AND (Benign Facial require a free flap and may at times also require
Neoplasm)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Benign Fa- patient-matched implants or patient-matched rigid fix-
cial Neoplasm)) OR ((3D Printing) AND (Benign Jaw ation. ICD-10: C41.0 Malignant neoplasm of bones of
Neoplasm)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Benign Jaw skull and face, C41.1 Malignant neoplasm of mandible
Neoplasm)) PubMed Search: ((3D Printing) AND (Malignant Neo-
Results: [244, 245] plasm Skull)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Malignant
Benign Neoplasms (Soft Tissue): Benign soft tissue Neoplasm Skull)) OR ((3D Printing) AND (Malignant
neoplasms of the craniomaxillofacial area include lesions Neoplasm Mandible)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND
of parotid or salivary glands, the lip, the floor of mouth, (Malignant Neoplasm Mandible)) OR ((virtual surgical
other parts of the mouth, tonsil, oropharynx, nasophar- planning) AND (Malignant Neoplasm Mandible)) OR
ynx and hypopharynx. Other cutaneous lesions include ((patient matched implant) AND (Malignant Neoplasm
neurofibromas, gliomas, dermoids, hemangiomas, lym- Mandible))
phangiomas and many other rarer tumors. Diagnosis Results: [36, 55, 72, 73, 82, 88, 107, 111, 114, 161,
and excision is indicated in all these lesions when pos- 202–205, 246–300]
sible. Complex cases can include resection and recon- Malignant Neoplasms (Soft Tissue): Malignant neo-
struction of soft tissue and hard tissue concomitantly. plasms of the soft tissue within the craniomaxillofacial
Reconstruction for complex cases may require autogen- region include cancers of the oral cavity (e.g. tongue,
ous tissue or a free flap and may at times also require floor of mouth maxillary and mandibular gingiva), oro-
patient-matched implants or rigid fixation. ICD-10: pharynx, hypopharynx, orbit, skull base and larynx. Simple
D11.0 Benign neoplasm of parotid gland, D11.7 Benign cases may only require biopsy while complex cases can in-
neoplasm of other major salivary glands, D10.0 Benign clude composite resection and reconstruction of soft tis-
neoplasm of lip, D10.1 Benign neoplasm of tongue, sue and hard tissue concomitantly. Reconstruction for
D10.2 Benign neoplasm of floor of mouth, D10.3 Benign complex cases may require autogenous tissue or a free flap
neoplasm of other and unspecified parts of mouth, and may at times also require patient-matched implants
D10.4 Benign neoplasm of tonsil, D10.5 Benign neo- or rigid fixation. ICD-10: C00 Malignant Neoplasm of Lip,
plasm of other parts of oropharynx, D10.6 Benign neo- C01 Malignant Neoplasm of Base of Tongue, C04 Malig-
plasm of nasopharynx, D10.7 Benign neoplasm of nant Neoplasm of Floor of Mouth, C05 Malignant Neo-
hypopharynx, D10.9 Benign neoplasm of pharynx, plasm of Palate, C30 Malignant neoplasm of nasal cavity
unspecified and middle ear, C31 Malignant neoplasm of accessory si-
PubMed Search: ((3D Printing) AND (Benign Parotid nuses, C32 Malignant neoplasm of larynx, C33 Malignant
Neoplasm)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Benign Par- neoplasm of trachea, D00.0 Carcinoma in situ of lip, oral
otid Neoplasm)) OR ((3D Printing) AND (Benign Saliv- cavity and pharynx, D00.1 Carcinoma in situ of esophagus
ary Gland Neoplasm)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND PubMed Search: ((3D Printing) AND (Malignant Neo-
(Benign Salivary Gland Neoplasm)) OR ((3D Printing) plasm Lip)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Malignant
AND (Benign Neoplasm Tonsil)) OR ((Rapid Prototyp- Neoplasm Lip)) OR ((3D Printing) AND (Malignant
ing) AND (Benign Neoplasm Tonsil)) OR ((3D Printing) Neoplasm Tongue)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Ma-
AND (Benign Neoplasm Oropharynx)) OR ((Rapid lignant Neoplasm Tongue)) OR ((3D Printing) AND
Prototyping) AND (Benign Neoplasm Oropharynx)) OR (Malignant Neoplasm Palate)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping)
((3D Printing) AND (Benign Neoplasm Nasopharynx)) AND (Malignant Neoplasm Palate)) OR ((3D Printing)
OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Benign Neoplasm Naso- AND (Malignant Neoplasm Sinus)) OR ((Rapid Proto-
pharynx)) OR ((3D Printing) AND (Benign Neoplasm typing) AND (Malignant Neoplasm Sinus)) OR ((3D
Hypopharynx)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Benign Printing) AND (Malignant Neoplasm Larynx)) OR
Neoplasm Hypopharynx)) ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Malignant Neoplasm Lar-
Results: No Relevant Papers ynx)) OR ((3D Printing) AND (Malignant Neoplasm
Malignant Neoplasms (Bone): Malignant neoplasms Trachea)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Malignant
of bone which can occur in the craniomaxillofacial re- Neoplasm Trachea)) OR ((3D Printing) AND (Carcin-
gion almost always require complex surgical interven- oma Lip)) OR ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Carcinoma
tion. Many times bone and soft tissue are involved in Lip)) OR ((3D Printing) AND (Carcinoma Pharynx)) OR
these cases and the resections encompass a margin of ((Rapid Prototyping) AND (Carcinoma Pharynx)) OR
uninvolved tissue to prevent recurrence. The difference ((3D Printing) AND (Carcinoma esophagus)) OR ((Rapid
between simple and complex may relate to the size of Prototyping) AND (Carcinoma Esophagus)) OR ((3D
Printing) AND (Carcinoma Oral Cavity)) OR ((Rapid abnormal development of the renal parenchyma, or
Prototyping) AND (Carcinoma Oral Cavity)) OR ((vir- inherited, due to abnormal cilium signaling in tubular
tual surgical planning) AND (Malignant Neoplasm Base epithelial cells [561]. Inherited cystic renal diseases are
of Tongue)) OR ((patient matched implant) AND (Ma- now included in the group of diseases termed ciliopa-
lignant Neoplasm Base of Tongue)) thies. Renal cysts are characterized based on the Bos-
Results: [55, 150, 204, 247–250, 278, 279, 287, 290, niak classification system which divides cystic renal
301, 302] masses into five categories based on imaging charac-
Genitourinary (Retrieved August 2017) teristics. Simple cysts are considered Bosniak 1, min-
Urolithiasis, Surgical or Medical Management: Cal- imally complex are Bosniak 2, intermediate are
culi or stones that form in the urinary tract, affecting the Bosniak 3, and malignant are Bosniak 4. Bosniak 3
kidneys, ureters, bladder or urethra is common and in- and 4 lesions undergoing surgical treatment such as
creasing in prevalence due to a variety of proposed fac- partial nephrectomy or radiofrequency ablation should
tors including obesity, dietary changes, and global be grouped in the renal cancer group described in
warming. Terms associated with urolithiasis include kid- the previous section.
ney stones, renal stones, renal calculus disease, nephro- PubMed Search: (3D printing AND Bosniak cystic le-
lithiasis, calculi. sions) or (rapid prototyping AND Bosniak cystic lesions)
PubMed Search: (3D printing AND urolithiasis) OR OR (3D printing AND Bosniak) OR (rapid prototyping
(3D printing AND kidney stones) OR (3D printing AND AND Bosniak) OR (3D printing AND renal cysts) OR
renal stones) OR (3D printing AND renal calculus dis- (rapid prototyping AND renal cysts) OR (3D printing
ease) OR (3D printing AND nephrolithiasis) OR (3D AND kidney cyst) OR (rapid prototyping AND kidney
printing AND calculi) OR (rapid prototyping AND uro- cyst) OR (3D printing AND, cystic renal dysplasia) OR
lithiasis) OR (rapid prototyping AND kidney stones) OR (rapid prototyping AND cystic renal dysplasia) OR (3D
(rapid prototyping AND renal stones) OR (rapid proto- printing AND polycystic kidney disease) OR (rapid
typing AND renal calculus disease) OR (rapid prototyp- prototyping AND polycystic kidney disease)
ing AND nephrolithiasis) OR (rapid prototyping AND Results: None
calculi) Lower Tract Tumors (bladder and urethra) and
Results: [303–309] Upper Tract Tumors (pyelocaliceal cavities and ur-
Renal Cancer: Renal cancer is common, with renal eter): Urothelial carcinomas can be located in the lower
cell carcinoma (RCC) accounting for approximately 3.5% (bladder and urethra) or the upper (pyelocalyceal cavities
of all malignancies [562]. In the US, there is predicted to and ureter) urinary tract. Bladder cancer accounts for
be 63,990 new diagnoses of RCC and 14,400 kidney can- the majority of urothelial malignancies. In 2017, there
cer related deaths in 2017. Surgical resection is the are estimated to be 79,030 new cases of bladder cancer
standard of care for RCC, with minimally invasive partial in the United States, 60,490 in men, making it the 4th
nephrectomy the treatment of choice for localized le- most prevalent cancer in men [562]. Cancer of the ur-
sions [561]. eter is uncommon and occurs most often in older adults
PubMed Search: (3D printing AND kidney cancer) OR who have been previously treated for bladder cancer.
(rapid prototyping and kidney cancer) OR (3D printing Transitional cell carcinoma is the most common hist-
AND renal cancer) OR (rapid prototyping AND renal ology observed.
cancer) OR (3D printing AND renal mass) OR (3D PubMed Search: 3D printing AND urothelial malig-
printing AND kidney mass) OR (rapid prototyping nancy OR rapid prototyping AND urothelial malignancy,
AND renal mass) OR (rapid prototyping AND kidney 3D printing AND urothelial malignancies OR rapid
mass) OR (3D printing AND renal cell carcinoma) prototyping AND urothelial malignancies, 3D printing
OR (3D printing AND RCC) OR (rapid prototyping AND urothelial carcinoma OR rapid prototyping AND
AND renal cell carcinoma) OR (rapid prototyping urothelial carcinoma, 3D printing AND transitional cell
AND RCC) carcinoma OR rapid prototyping AND transitional cell
Results: [308, 310–324] carcinoma, 3D printing AND bladder malignancy OR
The terms renal lymphoma, angiomyolipoma (AML) rapid prototyping AND bladder malignancy, 3D printing
and renal oncocytoma generated no results when AND bladder malignancies OR rapid prototyping AND
searched with 3D printing or rapid prototyping. bladder malignancies, (3D printing AND bladder cancer
Renal Cysts: Renal cysts are common; they are hetero- OR rapid prototyping AND bladder cancer, 3D printing
geneous in both origin and pathogenesis; and most are AND bladder neoplasm OR rapid prototyping AND
simple and are usually of little clinical significance. Cys- bladder neoplasm, 3D printing AND bladder mass OR
tic renal disease may be sporadic, from congenital anom- rapid prototyping AND bladder mass
alies of the kidney and urinary tract that result in Results: None Relevant
PubMed Search: (3D printing AND ureteral malig- prototyping AND polycystic ovarian disease) OR (rapid
nancy) OR (3D printing AND ureteral malignancies) OR prototyping AND PCOD)
(rapid prototyping AND ureteral malignancy) OR (rapid Results: None
prototyping and ureteral malignancies) OR (3D printing Uterine and Cervical Disease: The uterine corpus is
AND intrarenal collecting system malignancies) OR composed of endometrial mucosa and the underlying
(rapid prototyping AND intrarenal collecting system ma- smooth muscle myometrium. Frequent and significant
lignancies) OR (3D printing AND pyelocaliceal) OR uterine disorders include endometriosis, adenomyosis,
(rapid prototyping AND pyelocaliceal) OR (3D printing abnormal uterine bleeding, and lesions of the endomet-
AND pyelocalyceal) OR (rapid prototyping AND rium and myometrium including endometrial hyperpla-
pyelocalyceal) sia, endometrial carcinomas, endometrial polyps, and
Results: None Relevant smooth muscle tumors.
Adrenal Disease: The adrenal glands may be affected PubMed Search: (3D printing AND uterine cancer)
by a variety of pathologies, the majority of which are be- OR (rapid prototyping AND uterine cancer) OR (3D
nign. Causes of adrenal gland disorders include genetic printing AND cervical cancer) OR (rapid prototyping
mutations, tumors, infections, regulatory pathologies, or AND cervical cancer)
certain medications. Results: [335–342]
PubMed search: (3D printing AND adrenal disease) The terms endometrial adenocarcinoma, leiomyoma
OR (rapid prototyping AND adrenal disease) OR (3D (uterine fibroids), leiomyosarcoma, and endometrial
printing AND adrenal gland) OR (rapid prototyping stromal sarcoma generated no results when searched
AND adrenal gland) with 3D printing or rapid prototyping.
Results: [325] PubMed Search: (3D printing AND endometriosis) OR
Penile Cancer: Cancer of the penis is an uncommon (rapid prototyping AND endometriosis)
lesion occurring almost entirely in uncircumcised men. Results: [342]
An important pathological process in penile cancer, is PubMed Search: (3D printing AND endometritis) OR
squamous cell carcinoma, which is caused by the human (3D printing AND adenomyosis) OR (3D printing AND
papillomavirus (HPV). uterine bleeding) OR (rapid prototyping AND endomet-
PubMed Search: (3D printing AND penile cancer) OR ritis) OR (rapid prototyping AND adenomyosis) OR
(rapid prototyping AND penile cancer) (rapid prototyping) AND (uterine bleeding)
Results: None Results: None
Testicular Cancer: The majorities (95%) of testicular Vaginal Cancer
tumors are derived from germ cells and all masses of PubMed Search: 3D printing AND vaginal tumor OR
the testes are considered malignant until proven rapid prototyping AND vaginal tumor OR 3D printing
otherwise [562]. AND vaginal cancer OR rapid prototyping AND vaginal
PubMed Search: (3D printing AND testicular cancer) cancer
OR (rapid prototyping AND testicular cancer) Results: [339, 343]
Results: None Genitourinary Reconstruction: Genitourinary recon-
Prostate Cancer: Prostate cancer is the most common struction encompasses a broad range of surgical proce-
cancer in American men, accounting for almost 1 in 5 dures whose purpose is to correct congenital or acquired
new diagnoses [583]. Men diagnosed with prostate can- abnormalities. Terms: genitourinary conditions, genito-
cer have three primary treatment options including ac- urinary disorders, genitourinary anomalies, genitourinary
tive surveillance, surgery, and radiation. abnormalities, genital conditions, genital disorders, geni-
PubMed Search: (3D printing AND prostate cancer) tal anomalies, genital abnormalities.
OR (rapid prototyping AND prostate cancer) PubMed Search: (3D printing AND genitourinary re-
Results: [326–334] construction) OR (rapid prototyping AND genitourinary
Ovarian Disease: Ovarian disease includes ovarian reconstruction) OR (3D printing AND genitourinary dis-
cancer and ovarian cysts, as well as polycystic ovarian orders) OR (rapid prototyping AND genitourinary disor-
syndrome. ders) OR (3D printing AND genitourinary disorder) OR
PubMed Search: (3D printing AND ovarian tumor) (rapid prototyping AND genitourinary disorder) OR (3D
OR (rapid prototyping AND ovarian tumor) OR (3D printing AND genitourinary anomaly) OR (rapid proto-
printing AND ovarian cancer) OR (rapid prototyping typing AND genitourinary anomaly) OR (3D printing
AND ovarian cancer) AND genitourinary anomalies) OR (rapid prototyping
Results: None Relevant AND genitourinary anomalies) OR (3D printing AND
PubMed Search: (3D printing AND polycystic ovarian genitourinary abnormalities) OR (rapid prototyping
disease) OR (3D printing AND PCOD) OR (rapid AND genitourinary abnormalities) OR (3D printing
AND genitourinary abnormality) OR (rapid prototyping No results for PubMed search with 3D printing OR
AND genitourinary abnormality) OR (3D printing AND rapid prototyping AND the following: urinary tract in-
genital condition) OR (rapid prototyping AND genital fection, UTI, or pyelonephritis
condition) OR (3D printing AND genital anomaly) OR Pediatric Retroperitoneal Genitourinary Tumors:
(rapid prototyping AND genital anomaly) OR (3D print- The terms included Wilms tumor, nephroblastoma, and
ing AND genital anomalies) OR (rapid prototyping AND genitourinary tumor.
genital anomalies) OR (3D printing AND genitourinary PubMed Search: (3D printing AND pediatric genito-
abnormalities) OR (rapid prototyping AND genitouri- urinary tumor) OR (rapid prototyping AND pediatric
nary abnormalities) OR (3D printing AND genitourinary genitourinary tumor) OR (3D printing AND Wilms
abnormality) OR (rapid prototyping AND genitourinary tumor) OR (rapid prototyping AND Wilms tumor) OR
abnormality) (3D printing AND nephroblastoma) OR (rapid prototyp-
Results: None Relevant ing AND nephroblastoma)
Genitourinary Trauma: Injury to the genitourinary Results: None Relevant
tract is a common occurrence after both blunt and pene- Musculoskeletal (Retrieved February 2017)
trating trauma. Terms: genitourinary injury, urinary tract Fracture: Simple, Acute Complex Long Bone, Acute
trauma, renal trauma, kidney trauma (renal lacerations, Complex Intraarticular, Complex, Acetabular,
renal collecting system injury, renal vascular injury), ur- Non-Pathological Vertebral, Pathological Vertebral,
eteral trauma, bladder trauma, urethral trauma, adrenal Fracture Malunion.
trauma, scrotal trauma. PubMed Search: ((“printing, three-dimensional”[MeSH
PubMed Search: (3D printing AND genitourinary Terms] OR (“printing”[All Fields] AND “three-dimensio-
trauma) OR (rapid prototyping AND genitourinary nal”[All Fields]) OR “three-dimensional printing”[All
trauma) OR (3D printing AND genitourinary injury) OR Fields] OR (“3d”[All Fields] AND “printing”[All Fields])
(additive manufacturing AND genitourinary injury) OR OR “3d printing”[All Fields]) OR (rapid[All Fields] AND
(3D printing AND urinary tract trauma) OR (additive prototyping[All Fields])) AND ((“fractures, bone”[MeSH
manufacturing AND urinary tract trauma) OR (3D Terms] OR (“fractures”[All Fields] AND “bone”[All
printing AND renal trauma) OR (rapid prototyping Fields]) OR “bone fractures”[All Fields] OR “fracture”[All
AND renal trauma) OR (3D printing AND kidney Fields]) OR malunion[All Fields])
trauma) OR (rapid prototyping AND kidney trauma) OR Results: [345–406]
(3D printing AND renal laceration) OR (rapid prototyp- Heterotopic Ossification
ing AND renal laceration) OR (3D printing AND renal PubMed Search: ((“printing, three-dimensional”[MeSH
collecting system injury) OR (rapid prototyping AND Terms] OR (“printing”[All Fields] AND “three-dimensio-
renal collecting system injury) OR (3D printing AND nal”[All Fields]) OR “three-dimensional printing”[All
renal vascular injury) OR (rapid prototyping AND renal Fields] OR (“3d”[All Fields] AND “printing”[All Fields])
vascular injury) OR (3D printing AND ureteral trauma) OR “3d printing”[All Fields]) OR (rapid[All Fields] AND
OR (additive manufacturing AND ureteral trauma) OR prototyping[All Fields])) AND (“ossification, heteroto-
(3D printing AND ureteral injury) OR (additive manu- pic”[MeSH Terms] OR (“ossification”[All Fields] AND
facturing AND ureteral injury) OR (3D printing AND “heterotopic”[All Fields]) OR “heterotopic ossification”[All
bladder injury) OR (rapid prototyping AND bladder in- Fields] OR (“heterotopic”[All Fields] AND “ossificatio-
jury) OR (3D printing AND bladder trauma) OR (rapid n”[All Fields]))
prototyping AND bladder trauma) OR (3D printing AND Results: None relevant
adrenal trauma AND rapid prototyping AND adrenal Ligamentous Injury
trauma) OR (3d printing AND adrenal injury) OR (3D PubMed Search: ((“printing, three-dimensional”[MeSH
printing AND scrotal trauma) OR (rapid prototyping Terms] OR (“printing”[All Fields] AND “three-dimensio-
AND scrotal trauma) OR (3d printing AND scrotal injury) nal”[All Fields]) OR “three-dimensional printing”[All
Results: None Relevant Fields] OR (“3d”[All Fields] AND “printing”[All Fields])
Pediatric Infection and Reflux: Acute pyelonephritis OR “3d printing”[All Fields]) OR (rapid[All Fields] AND
is inflammation of the kidney, usually bacterial in origin. prototyping[All Fields])) AND ((“tendons”[MeSH
Terms: vesicoureteral reflux (VUR), urinary tract infec- Terms] OR “tendons”[All Fields] OR “tendon”[All
tion (UTI), acute pyelonephritis Fields]) OR (“ligaments”[MeSH Terms] OR “ligament-
PubMed search: (3D printing AND vesicoureteral re- s”[All Fields] OR “ligament”[All Fields]))
flux) OR (rapid prototyping AND vesicoureteral reflux) Results: [407, 408]
OR (3D printing AND VUR) OR (rapid prototyping Hip Dysplasia
AND VUR) PubMed Search: ((“printing, three-dimensional”[MeSH
Results: [344] Terms] OR (“printing”[All Fields] AND “three-
dimensional”[All Fields]) OR “three-dimensional printin- OR (“aortic”[All Fields] AND “dissection”[All Fields])

g”[All Fields] OR (“3d”[All Fields] AND “printing”[All OR “aortic dissection”[All Fields]) OR (“aortic aneur-
Fields]) OR “3d printing”[All Fields]) OR (rapid[All ysm”[MeSH Terms] OR (“aortic”[All Fields] AND
Fields] AND prototyping[All Fields])) AND (“hip dislo- “aneurysm”[All Fields]) OR “aortic aneurysm”[All
cation”[MeSH Terms] OR (“hip”[All Fields] AND “dislo- Fields]) OR ((“aorta”[MeSH Terms] OR “aorta”[All
cation”[All Fields]) OR “hip dislocation”[All Fields] OR Fields] OR “aortic”[All Fields]) AND (“stents”[MeSH
(“hip”[All Fields] AND “dysplasia”[All Fields]) OR “hip Terms] OR “stents”[All Fields] OR “stent”[All Fields]))
dysplasia”[All Fields]) OR ((“aorta”[MeSH Terms] OR “aorta”[All Fields] OR
Results: [389, 409–414] “aortic”[All Fields]) AND (“aneurysm, false”[MeSH
Bone or Soft Tissues Neoplasm: With or Without Terms] OR (“aneurysm”[All Fields] AND “false”[All
Joint and Neurovascular Involvement Fields]) OR “false aneurysm”[All Fields] OR “pseudoa-
PubMed Search: ((“printing, three-dimensional”[MeSH neurysm”[All Fields])))
Terms] OR (“printing”[All Fields] AND “three-dimensio- Results: [464–499]
nal”[All Fields]) OR “three-dimensional printing”[All Peripheral Aneurysm
Fields] OR (“3d”[All Fields] AND “printing”[All Fields]) PubMed Search: ((“printing, three-dimensional”[MeSH
OR “3d printing”[All Fields]) OR (rapid[All Fields] AND Terms] OR (“printing”[All Fields] AND “three-dimensio-
prototyping[All Fields])) AND (“bone neoplasms”[MeSH nal”[All Fields]) OR “three-dimensional printing”[All
Terms] OR (“bone”[All Fields] AND “neoplasms”[All Fields] OR (“3d”[All Fields] AND “printing”[All Fields])
Fields]) OR “bone neoplasms”[All Fields] OR (“bone”[All OR “3d printing”[All Fields]) OR (Rapid[All Fields] AND
Fields] AND “tumor”[All Fields]) OR “bone tumor”[All Prototyping[All Fields])) AND ((“arteries”[MeSH Terms]
Fields]) OR “arteries”[All Fields] OR “arterial”[All Fields]) AND
Results: [324, 353, 415–443] (“aneurysm”[MeSH Terms] OR “aneurysm”[All Fields]))
Arthritis, Not Otherwise Specified Results: [500–505]
PubMed Search: ((“printing, three-dimensional”[MeSH Stenosis, Arterial, Extracranial, for Patient-Specific
Terms] OR (“printing”[All Fields] AND “three-dimensio- Simulations
nal”[All Fields]) OR “three-dimensional printing”[All PubMed Search: ((“printing, three-dimensional”[MeSH
Fields] OR (“3d”[All Fields] AND “printing”[All Fields]) Terms] OR (“printing”[All Fields] AND “three-dimensio-
OR “3d printing”[All Fields]) OR (rapid[All Fields] AND nal”[All Fields]) OR “three-dimensional printing”[All
prototyping[All Fields])) AND (“arthritis”[MeSH Terms] Fields] OR (“3d”[All Fields] AND “printing”[All Fields])
OR “arthritis”[All Fields]) OR “3d printing”[All Fields]) OR (Rapid[All Fields] AND
Results: [358, 444–453] Prototyping[All Fields])) AND ((“constriction, patholo-
Scoliosis: Secondary to Congenital Vertebral Anom- gic”[MeSH Terms] OR (“constriction”[All Fields] AND
aly, Severe/Marked, Thoracic Kyphosis, None of the “pathologic”[All Fields]) OR “pathologic constriction”[All
Above Fields] OR “stenosis”[All Fields]) OR (“peripheral arterial
PubMed Search: ((“printing, three-dimensional”[MeSH disease”[MeSH Terms] OR (“peripheral”[All Fields]
Terms] OR (“printing”[All Fields] AND “three-dimensio- AND “arterial”[All Fields] AND “disease”[All Fields]) OR
nal”[All Fields]) OR “three-dimensional printing”[All “peripheral arterial disease”[All Fields]))
Fields] OR (“3d”[All Fields] AND “printing”[All Fields]) Results: [506–508]
OR “3d printing”[All Fields]) OR (rapid[All Fields] AND Vascular Malformations: Acquired, Congenital,
prototyping[All Fields])) AND (“scoliosis”[MeSH Terms] Rings, Slings, For Interventional Consideration – Ex-
OR “scoliosis”[All Fields]) cluding congenital heart disease and intracranial
Results: [438, 454–463] pathologies.
Vascular (Retrieved: Initial November 2017, Updated PubMed Search: ((“printing, three-dimensional”[MeSH
June 2018) Terms] OR (“printing”[All Fields] AND “three-dimensio-
Aortic Pathologies: Dissection, Aneurysm, Stenting, nal”[All Fields]) OR “three-dimensional printing”[All
Pseudoaneurysm Fields] OR (“3d”[All Fields] AND “printing”[All Fields])
PubMed Search: ((“printing, three-dimensional”[MeSH OR “3d printing”[All Fields]) OR (Rapid[All Fields] AND
Terms] OR (“printing”[All Fields] AND “three-dimensio- Prototyping[All Fields])) AND ((“vascular malforma-
nal”[All Fields]) OR “three-dimensional printing”[All tions”[MeSH Terms] OR (“vascular”[All Fields] AND
Fields] OR (“3d”[All Fields] AND “printing”[All Fields]) “malformations”[All Fields]) OR “vascular malformation-
OR “3d printing”[All Fields]) OR (rapid[All Fields] AND s”[All Fields] OR (“vascular”[All Fields] AND “malforma-
prototyping[All Fields])) AND ((“aneurysm, dissecting”[- tion”[All Fields]) OR “vascular malformation”[All
MeSH Terms] OR (“aneurysm”[All Fields] AND “dissec- Fields]) OR (“vascular ring”[MeSH Terms] OR (“vascu-
ting”[All Fields]) OR “dissecting aneurysm”[All Fields] lar”[All Fields] AND “ring”[All Fields]) OR “vascular
ring”[All Fields]) OR (“vascular ring”[MeSH Terms] OR Benign breast lesions: Benign breast lesions include
(“vascular”[All Fields] AND “ring”[All Fields]) OR “vas- fibrocystic change, benign breast masses, inflammatory,
cular ring”[All Fields] OR (“vascular”[All Fields] AND and peripartum conditions.
“sling”[All Fields]) OR “vascular sling”[All Fields])) PubMed Search: ((3D printing) AND (fibrocystic
Results: [509] change)) OR ((3D printing) AND (benign breast
Varices: Peripheral for Medical Management, Retro- masses)) OR ((3D printing) AND (mastitis)) OR ((3D
peritoneal for Medical Management, Intervention printing) AND (galactocele)) OR ((rapid prototyping)
Planning AND (fibrocystic change)) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND
PubMed Search: ((“printing, three-dimensional”[MeSH (benign breast masses)) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND
Terms] OR (“printing”[All Fields] AND “three-dimensio- (mastitis) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND (galactocele))
nal”[All Fields]) OR “three-dimensional printing”[All Results: None
Fields] OR (“3d”[All Fields] AND “printing”[All Fields]) High risk breast lesions: High risk lesions include flat
OR “3d printing”[All Fields]) OR (Rapid[All Fields] AND epithelial atypia, atypical ductal hyperplasia, lobular neo-
Prototyping[All Fields])) AND ((“varicose veins”[MeSH plasia, radial scar, papillary lesions and mucocele-like
Terms] OR (“varicose”[All Fields] AND “veins”[All lesions.
Fields]) OR “varicose veins”[All Fields] OR “varices”[All PubMed Search: ((3D printing) AND (flat epithelial
Fields]) OR (“varicose veins”[MeSH Terms] OR (“varico- atypia)) OR ((3D printing) AND (atypical ductal hyper-
se”[All Fields] AND “veins”[All Fields]) OR “varicose plasia)) OR ((3D printing) AND (lobular neoplasia)) OR
veins”[All Fields] OR “varix”[All Fields]) OR varicose[All ((3D printing) AND (radial scar)) OR ((3D printing)
Fields]) AND (papillary lesions) OR ((3D printing) AND
Results: None (mucocele-like lesions)) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND
Carotid Pathologies: Stenosis, Dissection, Pseudoa- (flat epithelial atypia)) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND
neurysm, Post-Endarterectomy (atypical ductal hyperplasia)) OR ((rapid prototyping)
PubMed Search: ((“printing, three-dimensional”[MeSH AND (lobular neoplasia) OR ((rapid prototyping)
Terms] OR (“printing”[All Fields] AND “three-dimensio- AND (radial scar)) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND
nal”[All Fields]) OR “three-dimensional printing”[All (papillary lesions)) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND
Fields] OR (“3d”[All Fields] AND “printing”[All Fields]) (mucocele-like lesions))
OR “3d printing”[All Fields]) OR (Rapid[All Fields] AND Results: No results found.
Prototyping[All Fields])) AND carotid[All Fields] Breast cancer: Malignant breast lesions included
Results: [510–514] ductal carcinoma in situ ductal (DCIS) and invasive
Intracranial Pathologies: Stenosis, Aneurysm, Dural breast carcinomas. Use in breast malignancies with chest
AV Fistula, Arteriovenous Malformation wall involvement and/or nipple-areolar complex involve-
PubMed Search: ((“printing, three-dimensional”[MeSH ment, evaluation of tumor-breast size ratio, and tumors
Terms] OR (“printing”[All Fields] AND “three-dimensio- where oncoplastic surgery is considered.
nal”[All Fields]) OR “three-dimensional printing”[All PubMed Search: ((3D printing) AND (breast cancer)
Fields] OR (“3d”[All Fields] AND “printing”[All Fields]) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND (breast cancer))
OR “3d printing”[All Fields]) OR (Rapid[All Fields] AND Results: [546–552]
Prototyping[All Fields])) AND ((“constriction, patholo-
gic”[MeSH Terms] OR (“constriction”[All Fields] AND
“pathologic”[All Fields]) OR “pathologic constriction”[All
Abbreviations
Fields] OR “stenosis”[All Fields]) OR (“aneurysm”[MeSH 3D: Three-dimensional; ACR: American College of Radiology; ASD: Atrial
Terms] OR “aneurysm”[All Fields]) OR (Dural[All septal defect; AV: Atrioventricular; CAD: Computer aided design;
CDRH: The center for devices and radiological health; CHD: Congenital
Fields] AND (“arteriovenous fistula”[MeSH Terms] OR
heart disease; CMF: Craniomaxillofacial; CNR: Contrast to noise ratio;
(“arteriovenous”[All Fields] AND “fistula”[All Fields]) CT: Computed tomography; DICOM: Digital imaging and
OR “arteriovenous fistula”[All Fields] OR (“av”[All communications in medicine; DOLV: Double-outlet left ventricle;
Fields] AND “fistula”[All Fields]) OR “av fistula”[All DORV: Double-outlet right ventricle; EACTS-STS: European Association for
Cardio-Thoracic Surgery / Society of Thoracic Surgery; FDA: The United
Fields])) OR (“arteriovenous malformations”[MeSH States Food and Drug Administration; FOV: Field of view; HIPAA: Health
Terms] OR (“arteriovenous”[All Fields] AND “malforma- Insurance Portability and Accountability Act; ICD-10: International
tions”[All Fields]) OR “arteriovenous malformations”[All Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision; IPCCC: International Pediatric
and Congenital Cardiac Code; MRI: Magnetic resonance imaging;
Fields] OR (“arteriovenous”[All Fields] AND “malforma- NOS: Not otherwise specified; PACS: Picture archiving and
tion”[All Fields]) OR “arteriovenous malformation”[All communication system; PAPVR: Partial anomalous pulmonary venous
return; ROI: Region of interest; RSNA: Radiological Society of North
Fields]))
America; RVOT: Right ventricular outflow tract; SIG: Special Interest
Results: [501, 515–545] Group; SNR: Signal to noise ratio; STL: Standard tessellation language;
Breast (Retrieved November 2017) TAPVR: Total anomalous pulmonary venous return; TGA: Transposition of
the great arteries; VRML: Virtual reality markup language; VSD: Ventricular Daniel Davis, RT, BS, Denver, CO, United States
septal defect Daniel LaRussa, PhD, Department of Radiology, The University of Ottawa
Faculty of Medicine, Ottawa, ON, Canada
Acknowledgements Daniel S. Madsen, MD, Dept of Interventional Radiology, San Antonio Military
Med Ctr, Fort Sam Houston, TX, United States
RSNA SIG Faculty Members (July 15, 2018) Daniele Marin, MD, Cary, NC, United States
Abraham Levitin, MD, Beachwood, OH, United States Darshit Thakrar, MD, Dept of Pediatric Radiology, Childrens Hospital of
Adam C. Zoga, MD, Dept of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Pittsburgh of UPMC, Pittsburgh, PA, United States
Philadelphia, PA, United States Dave Nuthals, Vital Images, Minnetonka, MN, United States
Alejandro A. Espinoza, PhD, Dept of Orthopedic Surgery, Rush University David Dreizin, MD, Dept of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, University of
Medical Center, Chicago, IL, United States Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, United States
Alexander J. Chien, MD, Chino Hills, CA, United States David M. Hough, MD, Rochester, MN, United States
Amar B. Shah, MD, New York, NY, United States David MacCutcheon, TeraRecon, Foster City, MA, United States
Ambroise Mathurin Dzogang Temdemno, MD, CARIM, Yaounde, Cameroon Daya Vora, MD, Troy, MI, United States
Amin S. Chaoui, MD, Wellesley, MA, United States Deborah E. Starkey, RT, Medical Radiation Sciences, Queensland University of
Amy E. Alexander, MS, Dept of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
Anand V. Rao, MD, Brookfield, WI, United States Denis Samama, MD, Service d’Imagerie Medicale, Neuilly-sur-Seine, France
Anne Garcia, Opheart, Houston, TX, United States Derek L. West, MD, Dept of Radiology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United
Angel R Colon, MD, Mayaguez, PR, United States States
Antoine Leimgruber, MD, MS, Pully, VD, Switzerland Diane M. Twickler, MD, Dept of Radiology, Univ of Texas Southwestern
Antoine M. Vanderhofstadt, MD, Brussels, Belgium Medical Ctr, Dallas, TX, United States
Asra Khan-Bonenberger, MD, Orlando, FL, United States Donald S. Emerson, MD, Memphis, TN, United States
Attilio A. Guazzoni, MD, Dept of Radiology, San Biagio Hospital, Dong Xu, MD, PhD, Dept of Ultrasound, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, Hangzhou,
Domodossola, VB, Italy Zhejiang, China
Barbara L. McComb, MD, Ponte Vedra, FL, United States Dorothy J. Shum, MD, Dept of Radiology, University of California San
Benjamin E. Tubb, MD, PhD, San Antonio, TX, United States Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States
Benjamin Johnson, 3DSystems, Littleton, CO, United States Eddy D. Lucas, MD, Wichita, KS, United States
Benjamin M. Howe, MD, Dept of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, Eduardo M. Rosa, MD, Radiologica Los Volcanes, Puerto Montt, Decima
United States Region, Chile
Berdoudi Rabah, MD, Dept of Radiology, Imagerie Medicale du Charollais, Edward A. Del Grosso, MD, Granville, OH, United States
Paray-le-Monial, France Edward P. Quigley, III, MD, PhD, Salt Lake City, UT, United States
Bernadette M. Greenwood, BS, RT, Desert Medical Imaging, Indian Wells, CA, Edward Stefanowicz, MBA, RT, Dept of Radiology, Geisinger Health System,
United States Danville, PA, United States
Beth A. Ripley, MD, PhD, Dept of Radiology, University of Washington, Enrique R. Escobar, MD, Melilla, Spain
Seattle, WA, United States Eric M. Baumel, MD, Digital Imaging Diagnostics PLC, Wellington, FL, United
Beth M. Kline-Fath, MD, Dept of Radiology (MLC 5031), Children’s Hospital States
Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, United States Eric Teil, MD, Tresserve, France
Brent Chanin, BEng, Mediprint.us, Chester, NY, United States Erik W. Stromeyer, MD, Miami Beach, FL, United States
Brian A. Tweddale, MD, Doylestown, PA, United States Ernest J. Ferris, MD, Little Rock, AR, United States
Brian McNamee, MD, Coeur D Alene, ID, United States Fabrizio D’Alessandro, MD, Massa, Ron, Italy
Bruce M. Barack, MD, Los Angeles, CA, United States Fadi Toonsi, MBBS, FRCPC, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Bruce M. Shuckett, MD, Toronto, ON, Canada Faisal M. Shah, MD, Scotch Plains, NJ, United States
Bryan Crutchfield, Materialise, Plymouth, MI, United States Fernando A. Alvarado Sr, MD, Dept of Radiology, Diagnos, Machala, El Oro,
Carina L. Butler, MD, Lexington, KY, United States Ecuador
Carlin A. Ridpath, MD, Springfield, MO, United States Francesco Potito, MD, Dept of MRI CT, Centro Radiologico Potito,
Carlos I. Hernandez Rojas, MD, Lima 27, Peru Campobasso, CB, Italy
Carlos Torres, MD, Ottawa, ON, Canada Frank S. Bonelli, MD, PhD, Rockford, IL, United States
Carolina A. Souza, MD, Ottawa, ON, Canada Freddy Drews, MD, Avon Lake, OH, United States
Chen C. Hoffmann, MD, Dept of Diagnostic Radiology, Ramat-Gan, Israel Gaetano T. Pastena, MD, MBA, Glenmont, NY, United States
Cheryl L. Kirby, MD, Cherry Hill, NJ, United States Gary W. Kerber, MD, Urbana, IL, United States
Ching-Lan Wu, MD, Dept of Radiology, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Gene Kitamura, MD, Dept of Radiology, UPMC, Pittsburgh, PA, United States
Taipei, Taiwan George Antaki, MD, Riverview, FL, United States
Chris Letrong, RT, ARRT, San Jose, CA, United States Georgina A. Viyella, MD, Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic
Christina Kotsarini, MD, PhD, Glasgow, United Kingdom Gerard P. Farrar, MD, Hemlock, MI, United States
Christine J. Kim, MD, Dept of Neuroradiology, Brigham and Women’s Gloria M. Rapoport, MD, Forest Hills, NY, United States
Hospital, Boston, MA, United States Gul Moonis, MD, South Orange, NJ, United States
Christopher A. Swingle, DO, Saint Louis, MO, United States H. Henry Guo, MD, Fremont, CA, United States
Christopher E. Smith, MD, Rch Palos Vrd, CA, United States Halemane S. Ganesh, MD, Lexington, KY, United States
Christopher Wilke, MD, Dept of Radiation Oncology, Univ of Minnesota Han N. Ta, MD, Newport Coast, CA, United States
School of Medicine, Minneapolis, MN, United States Haraldur Bjarnason, MD, Dept of Vascular & Interventional Radiology, Mayo
Christopher Yurko, MD, Vallejo, CA, United States Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States
Claudio Silva, MD, Radiology Department, Clinica Alemana, Facultad de Hemant T. Patel, MD, Samved Hospital, Ahmedabad, India
Medicina Clinica Alemana Universidad del Desarrollo, Santiago, Chile Hongju Son, MD, Dept of Radiology, Einstein Healthcare Network,
Colin M. Wilson, MA, Dept of Radiology, University of New Mexico, Philadelphia, PA, United States
Albuquerque, NM, United States Hui J. Chen, MD, San Francisco, CA, United States
Craig S. Howard, MD, Hattiesburg, MS, United States Hyun-Ju Lee, MD, PhD, Dept of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital,
Damodaran Arul Selvam, MD, Dept of Radiology, Malcolm Randall VA Seoul, Korea, Republic of
Medical Center, Gainesville, FL, United States Irini M. Youssef, MD, MPH, Hollidaysburg, PA, United States
Dana A. Fuller, MD, Dallas, TX, United States Jack M. Drew, MD, Littleton, CO, United States
Daniel A. Crawford, MSc, BSc, Dept of Medical 3D Printing, Axial3D, Belfast, Jaime Ribeiro Barbosa, MD, Instituto de Radiologia Pres Prudente, Presidente
Antrim, United Kingdom Prudente, SP, Brazil
James B. Allison, MD, Richmond, VT, United States Louis T. Kircos, DDS, PhD, San Rafael, CA, United States
James Shin, MD, MSc, New York, NY, United States Luc Lacoursiere, MD, FRCPC, Quebec, QC, Canada
Jared V. Grice, DMP, Nashville, TN, United States Luca Remonda, MD, Aarau, Aargau, Switzerland
Jaroslaw Ast, MD, Poznan, Wielkopolska, Poland Lucas M. Sheldon, MD, Niceville, FL, United States
Jayanthi Parthasarathy BDS, PhD, Nationwide Children’s Hospital, Columbus, Luigi Grazioli, MD, Servizio di Radiologia, University of Brescia/Spedali Civili
OH, United States Brescia, Brescia, BS, Italy
Jeffrey A. Haithcock, MD, Colleyville, TX, United States Luis A. Campos, MD, Lima 33, Lima, Peru
Jeffrey A. Sodergren, MD, Mountain Top, PA, United States Luis A. Rodriguez Palomares, MD, Delegacion: Benito Juarez, Mexico City,
Jeffrey D. Hirsch, MD, Lutherville, MD, United States Mexico
Jesus D. Buonomo, MD, Gurabo, PR, United States Mamdouh E. Rayan, MD, MSc, Chicago, IL, United States
Joaquim M. Farinhas, MD, Tampa, FL, United States Marc J. Gollub, MD, New York, NY, United States
Joel M. Stein, MD, PhD, Div of Neuroradiology, Hospital of the University of Margaret O. Brown, MD, Walton, KY, United States
Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States Mariah N. Geritano, MSc, Brookline, MA, United States
Johannes Goerich, MD, Eberbach, Baden, Germany Mariam Thomas, MD, Los Angeles, CA, United States
John A. Skinner, MD, Dept of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United Mariano Sturla, MD, Castelar, Buenos Aires, Argentina
States Mark A. Smith, MS, ARRT, Columbus, OH, United States
John G. O’Rourke, MBBS, Sydney, NSW, Australia Mark D. Alson, MD, Fresno, CA, United States
John Oh, MD, Las Vegas, NV, United States Mark E. Sharafinski Jr., MD, Madison, WI, United States
John P. Knoedler Jr., MD, North Oaks, MN, United States Marshall B. Hay, MD, Portage, MI, United States
Jonathan A. Aziza, MD, Thornhill, ON, Canada Mary Ellen Wickum, MS, Cambridge, MA, United States
Jonathan M. Ford, PhD, Dept of Radiology, University of South Florida Mary Hu, MD, MS, Flushing, NY, United States
College of Medicine, Tampa, FL, United States Mary L. Christie, Rockland, MA, United States
Jorge E. Salazar, MD, UT Medical Group Inc., Memphis, TN, United States Mashael K. Alrujaib, FRCR, FRCPC, Dept of Radiology (MBC-28), King Faisal
Jose A. Barriocanal, MD, PhD, Chattanooga, TN, United States Specialist Hospital, Riyadh, Central Region, Saudi Arabia
Jose A. Maldonado, MD, San Juan, PR, United States Matthew Allen, MD, Redding Cancer Treatment Center, Redding, CA, United
Joseph Johnnie, MS, BEng, Medivators, Conroe, TX, United States States
Joseph M. Aulino, MD, Brentwood, TN, United States Mayola C. Boykin, MD, Ashland, KY, United States
Josephine Pressacco, MD, PhD, Dept of Diagnostic Radiology (D5–113), Melanie Gillies, BSc, Coolangatta, QLD, Australia
MUHC/Montreal General Hospital, Montreal, QC, Canada Michael D. Maloney, MD, Yreka, CA, United States
Judy H. Song, MD, Medstar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, Michael Gaisford, Stratasys, Cambridge, MA, United States
United States Michael L. Richardson, MD, Dept of Radiology, University of Washington,
Juergen Brandt, MD, Arnsberg, Germany Seattle, WA, United States
Julie S. Lee, MD, Seattle, WA, United States Michael T. McGuire, MD, Jersey City, NJ, United States
Juling Ong I, MBBS, Dept of Plastic Surgery/3D Facility, Great Ormond Street Michael T. Miller, MD, Pittsford, NY, United States
Hospital for Children, London, United Kingdom Michael W. Itagaki, MD, MBA, Bellevue, WA, United States
Justin Sutherland, PhD, Department of Radiology, The University of Ottawa Michel Berube, MD, Chicoutimi, QC, Canada
Faculty of Medicine, Ottawa, ON, Canada Michel D. Dumas, MD, Abilene, TX, United States
Michelle L. Walker, MS, Clearwater, FL, United States
Karen K. Moeller, MD, Louisville, KY, United States
Mohammad Eghtedari, MD, PhD, San Diego, CA, United States
Katherine Weimer, 3D Systems - Healthcare, Littleton, CO, United States
Muge Ozhabes, MD, Marina Del Rey, CA, United States
Kathleen G. Oxner, MD, Greenville, SC, United States
Nathaniel Reichek, MD, Fort Salonga, NY, United States
Kathryn E. Pflug, MD, Dept of Radiology, Lakeview Regional Medical Center, Naveen K. Gowda, MD, Dept of Radiology, St. Lukes Hospital, Duluth, MN,
Covington, LA, United States United States
Kelly D. Smith, MD, Mitchell, SD, United States Nicholas C. Fraley, MD, Oro Valley, AZ, United States
Kelly Oppe, RT, Dept of Radiology, Carle Foundation Hospital, Urbana, IL, Nicholas G. Rhodes, MD, Rochester, MN, United States
United States Nopporn Beokhaimook, MD, Nonthaburi, Thailand
Kenneth A. Buckwalter, MD, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, United States Pamela A. Rowntree, RT, Medical Radiation Sciences, Queensland University
Kenneth L. Sandock, MD, Tucson, AZ, United States of Technology, Brisbane, Qld, Australia
Kent R. Thielen, MD, Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, Pascal Fontaine, DVM, MSc, Montreal, QC, Canada
United States Patricia A. Rhyner, MD, Atlanta, GA, United States
Kevin A. Lugo, MBA, ARRT, Raleigh, NC, United States Patrick Chang, MD, Dept of Radiology, Kaiser South San Francisco Medical
Kevin J. Roche, MD, New Hope, PA, United States Ctr, San Francisco, CA, United States
Kevin L. Pope, MD, Breast Center of Northwest Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, Paul E. Lizotte, DO, MA, Valley Center, CA, United States
United States Paulo M. Bernardes, MD, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
Keyur Mehta, MD, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, United States Pedro E. Diaz, MD, Guaynabo, PR, United States
Kimberly Torluemke, 3D Systems, Healthcare, Littleton, CO, United States Pen-An Liao, MD, Taipei City, Taiwan
Kirby K. Wong, MBBS, MPH, Sydney, NSW, Australia Perla M. Salgado, MD, Cuernavaca, Morelos, Mexico
Klaus Kubin, MD, CT/MR Institutes, Medical Center Schallmoos, Salzburg, Peter M. Van Ooijen, MSc, PhD, Dept of Radiology, University Medical Center
Austria of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
Kranthi K. Kolli, PhD, MS, New York, NY, United States Peter Piechocniski, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City,
Kristi B. Oatis, MD, Lexington, KY, United States NY, United States
Kwok-chung Lai, MBChB, FRCR, Dept of Radiology & Imaging, Queen Philip S. Lim, MD, Dept of Radiology, Abington Memorial Hospital, Abington,
Elizabeth Hospital, Kowloon, Hong Kong PA, United States
Lance E. Reinsmith, MD, San Antonio, TX, United States Philipp Brantner, MD, Binningen, Switzerland
Lauralyn McDaniel, MBA, SME, Dearborn, MI, United States Philippe Grouwels, MD, Hasselt, Belgium
Leizle E. Talangbayan, MD, Long Branch, NJ, United States Phillip D. Baker, MD, PhD, Dept of Radiology, Legacy Good Samaritan
Leszek J. Jaszczak, MD, Williston, ND, United States Hospital, Portland, OR, United States
Ligia Cardona, MD, Santo Domingo, Distrito Nacional, Dominican Republic Prasad S. Dalvie, MD, Dept of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison,
Lincoln Wong, MD, Omaha, NE, United States WI, United States
Liza Nellyta, MD, Department of Radiology, RS Awal Bros Pekanbaru, Qurashi M. Ali Fadlelseed, MD, PhD, National College for Med & Technical
Pekanbaru, Riau, Indonesia Studies, Kitarfoum, Sudan
R. Scott Rader, PhD, GE Healthcare, Marlborough, MA, United States Vinicius V. Alves, Niteroi, RJ, Brazil
Rajaram E. Reddy, MD, St Catherines, ON, Canada W. Brian Hyslop, MD, PhD, Dept of Radiology, University of North Carolina,
Rami M. Shorti, PhD, Intermountain Healthcare, South Jordan, UT, United States Chapel Hill, NC, United States
Ramin Javan, MD, Washington, DC, United States Wael M. Abdalla, MD, Presby South Tower, Henderson, NV, United States
Randolph K. Otto, MD, Edmonds, WA, United States Walter A. Carpenter, MD, PhD, Atlanta, GA, United States
Raphael J. Alcuri, MD, Whitesboro, NY, United States Wellington Eddy Reynaldo Paez Zumarraga, MD, Quito, Ecuador
Rasim C. Oz, MD, Baltimore, MD, United States William D. Boswell Jr., MD, Dept of Diagnostic Radiology, City of Hope
Richard A. Levy, MD, Saugerties, NY, United States National Medical Center, Duarte, CA, United States
Richard E. Barlow, MD, Sandy Springs, GA, United States William Prows, Intermountain Healthcare, Murray, UT, United States
Richard K. Brown, MD, Dept of Nuclear Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Xing-Jun Gao, MD, Department of Radiology, Xinyang Central Hospital,
Arbor, MI, United States Xinyang, Henan, China
Richard Shoenfeld, MD, Mountain Lks, NJ, United States Yeong Shyan Lee, MBBCh, Department of Diagnostic Radiology (Basement
Rikesh J. Makanji, MD, Tampa, FL, United States 1), Singapore, Singapore
Robert A. Posniak, MD, Windermere, FL, United States Yiwen Chen, PhD, Dept of 3D Printing Med Research, China Medical
Robert L. Falk, MD, Prospect, KY, United States University Hospital, Taichung City, Taiwan
Robert M. DeWitt, MD, APO, AE, United States Yoshimi Anzai, MD, Dept of Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake Cty, UT,
Robert S. Redlich, MD, Hudson, OH, United States United States
Robyn A. Pugash, MD, Dept of Medical Imaging, Sunnybrook HSC, Toronto, Zheng Jin, MS, New York, NY, United States
ON, Canada
Roy G. Bryan Jr., MD, MBA, Radiology, Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital, Santa Trainee Members (July 15, 2018)
Barbara, CA, United States Adrian A. Negreros-Osuna, MD, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA,
Salim S. Merchant, FRANZCR, Melbourne, VIC, Australia United States
Sang Joon Park, PhD, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea, Andreas Giannopoulos, MD, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
Republic of Andres Vasquez, MD, MSc, New York, NY, United States
Sang-Sun Han, MD, Dept of Oral & Maxillofacial Radiology, Yonsei University Boris Kumaev, DO, University of Florida, Jacksonville, FL, United States
College of Dentistry, Seoul, Korea, Republic of Carissa M. White, MD, Venice, CA, United States
Sanjay M. Mallya, DDS, PhD, Dept of Oral & Maxillofacial Radiology, UCLA Eduardo Hernandez-Rangel, MD, University of California, Santa Ana, CA,
School of Dentistry, Los Angeles, CA, United States United States
Sanjay P. Prabhu, MBBS, FRCR, Dept of Pediatric Neuroradiology, Childrens Elias Kikano, MD, Mayfield Heights, OH, United States
Hospital Boston, Boston, MA, United States Elisa Spoldi, DVM, University of Florida College of Veterinary Med, Gainesville,
Sankar P. Sinha, MBBS, FRCR, Nuneaton, Warwickshire, United Kingdom FL, United States
Sanket Chauhan, MD, Dept of Surgery, Baylor University Medical Center, Jessica D. Shand Smith, MBChB, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
Dallas, TX, United States Justin Kerby, II, MD, MS, Wichita, KS, United States
Satinder S. Rekhi Jr., MD, Manorville, NY, United States Kirk P. Langheinz, MD, Lafayette General Medical Center - Cancer Center of
Scott H. Faro, MD, Haddonfield, NJ, United States Acadiana, Lafayette, LA, United States
Scott T. Williams, MD, San Juan Capo, CA, United States Luis G. Ricardez, MD, Hospital Civil de Culiacan, Culiacan, Sinaloa, Mexico
Sepideh Sefidbakht, MD, Powel, OH, United States Michael Bartellas, MS, St Johns, NL, Canada
Sergio A. Gonzalez, MD, El Paso, TX, United States Narayana Vamyanmane Dhananjaya Kotebagilu, MBBS, MBA, Abhayahasta
Seth J. Berkowitz, MD, Brookline, MA, United States Multispeciality Hospital, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
Shannon N. Zingula, MD, Dept of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, Sadia R. Qamar, MBBS, Vancouver General Hospital, UBC, Vancouver, BC,
United States Canada
Shannon R. Kirk, MD, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA, United States Sherazad Islam, MD, Glenview, IL, United States
Sharon W. Gould, MD, Kemblesville, PA, United States Vasanthakumar Venugopal, MD, New Delhi, Delhi, India
Shuai Leng, PhD, Dept of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States Vjekoslav Kopacin, MD, Osijek, Croatia
Sidney D. Machefsky, MD, University Cy, MO, United States Yu-hui Huang, MS, Chicago, IL, United States
Sofiane Derrouis, MD, Neuchatel, Switzerland
Srini Malini, MD, Womens Specialists of Houston at TCH, Texas Childrens Affiliated Contributors (non-members of the Special Interest Group)
Hospital Pavilion for Women, Houston, TX, United States Jeffrey P Jacobs, MD, Division of Cardiovascular Surgery and Director of the
Stephane Khazoom, MD, Chambly, QC, Canada Andrews/Daicoff Cardiovascular Program, Johns Hopkins All Children’s Heart
Stephen E. Russek, PhD, NIST, Boulder, CO, United States Institute, St Petersburg, FL
Steven C. Horii, MD, Dept of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania Medical Kenneth E. Salyer, MD, World Craniofacial Foundation, Dallas, TX, US and
Center, Philadelphia, PA, United States Texas A&M University, Dallas, TX, US
Steven R. Parmett, MD, Teaneck, NJ, United States R. Bryan Bell, MD, DDS, Providence Head and Neck Cancer Program,
Sumit Pruthi, MBBS, Dept of Radiology, Vanderbilt Childrens Hospital, Providence Cancer Institute, Portland, OR, US and Head & Neck Surgical
Nashville, TN, United States Associates, Portland, OR, US
Summer J. Decker, PhD, Dept of Radiology, University of South Florida
College of Medicine, Tampa, FL, United States Authors’ contributions
Tan M. Nguyen, MD, Dept of Radiology, Sacramento, CA, United States All primary authors edited, reviewed, and approved this manuscript. All included
Terence J. O’Loughlin, MD, Provincetown, MA, United States special interest group member coauthors, listed in the Acknowledgements
Terry C. Lynch, MD, Dept of Radiology, San Francisco General Hospital, San section, were provided with the final manuscript for review and approved its
Francisco, CA, United States publication.
Timothy L. Auran, MD, San Luis Obispo, CA, United States
Todd Goldstein, PhD, Northwell Health, USA, NY, United States Competing interests
The primary authors declare no competing interests. RSNA Special Interest
Todd Pietila, Materialise, Plymouth, MI, United States
Group for 3D Printing includes a variety of industry representatives with
Tone Lindgren, MD, Pelham, NY, United States
voting privileges, including representatives from Materialise Inc., Stratasys,
Tracy S. Chen, DO, MPH, Carmel, CA, United States
3D Systems, and TeraRecon, as detailed in the Acknowledgements section.
Vartan M. Malian, MD, Roseville, CA, United States
Vicente Gilsanz, MD, PhD, Dept of Radiology, Childrens Hospital Los Angeles,
Los Angeles, CA, United States Publisher’s Note
Victor A. McCoy, MD, Prairieville, LA, United States Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published
Vijay Jayaram, MBBS, PhD, Enfield, Middlesex, United Kingdom maps and institutional affiliations.
Author details 15. Sodian R, Weber S, Markert M, Rassoulian D, Kaczmarek I, Lueth TC, Reichart
1
Department of Radiology and The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, B, Daebritz S. Stereolithographic models for surgical planning in congenital
University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada. 2Center for Advanced Imaging heart surgery. Ann Thorac Surg. 2007;83(5):1854–7.
Innovation and Research (CAI2R), Bernard and Irene Schwartz Center for 16. Valverde I, Gomez G, Gonzalez A, Suarez-Mejias C, Adsuar A, Coserria JF,
Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, NYU School of Medicine, Uribe S, Gomez-Cia T, Hosseinpour AR. Three-dimensional patient-specific
New York, NY, USA. 3Sackler Institute of Graduate Biomedical Sciences, NYU cardiac model for surgical planning in Nikaidoh procedure. Cardiol Young.
School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA. 4Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, 2015;25(4):698–704.
CA, USA. 5Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Division of Diagnostic 17. Schievano S, Migliavacca F, Coats L, Khambadkone S, Carminati M, Wilson N,
Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, Deanfield JE, Bonhoeffer P, Taylor AM. Percutaneous pulmonary valve
USA. 6Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of implantation based on rapid prototyping of right ventricular outflow tract
Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA. 7Baltimore VA Medical Center, University of and pulmonary trunk from MR data. Radiology. 2007;242(2):490–7.
Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA. 8Department of Radiology and 18. Ryan JR, Moe TG, Richardson R, Frakes DH, Nigro JJ, Pophal S. A novel
Frankel Cardiovascular Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. approach to neonatal Management of Tetralogy of Fallot, with pulmonary
9
Department of Neurosurgery, State University of New York Buffalo, Buffalo, atresia, and multiple Aortopulmonary collaterals. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging.
NY, USA. 10Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. 113D 2015;8(1):103–4.
Medical Applications Center, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, 19. Bhatla P, Tretter JT, Chikkabyrappa S, Chakravarti S, Mosca RS. Surgical
Washington, DC, USA. planning for a complex double-outlet right ventricle using 3D printing.
Echocardiography. 2017;34(5):802–4.
Received: 7 August 2018 Accepted: 19 September 2018 20. Farooqi KM, Gonzalez-Lengua C, Shenoy R, Sanz J, Nguyen K. Use of a three
dimensional printed cardiac model to assess suitability for biventricular
repair. World J Pediatr Congenit Heart Surg. 2016;7(3):414–6.
21. Farooqi KM, Nielsen JC, Uppu SC, Srivastava S, Parness IA, Sanz J, Nguyen K.
References
Use of 3-dimensional printing to demonstrate complex intracardiac
1. Chaowu Y, Hua L, Xin S. Three-dimensional printing as an aid in
relationships in double-outlet right ventricle for surgical planning. Circ
Transcatheter closure of Secundum atrial septal defect with rim deficiency.
Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;8(5):e003043. https://doi.org/10.1161/
Circulation. 2016;133(17):e608–10.
CIRCIMAGING.114.003043.
2. Faganello G, Campana C, Belgrano M, Russo G, Pozzi M, Cioffi G, Lenarda
22. Dydynski PB, Kiper C, Kozik D, Keller BB, Austin E, Holland B. Three-
AD. Three dimensional printing of an atrial septal defect: is it multimodality
dimensional reconstruction of Intracardiac anatomy using CTA and surgical
imaging? Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016;32(3):427–8.
planning for double outlet right ventricle: early experience at a tertiary care
3. Luo H, Xu Y, Wang Z, Liu Y, Gao C. Three-dimensional printing model-
congenital heart center. World J Pediatr Congenit Heart Surg. 2016;7(4):467–
guided percutaneous closure of atrial septal defect. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2017;
74. https://doi.org/10.1177/2150135116651399.
108(5):484–5.
4. Qiu X, Lü B, Xu N, Yan CW, Ouyang WB, Liu Y, Zhang FW, Yue ZQ, Pang KJ, 23. Kappanayil M, Koneti NR, Kannan RR, Kottayil BP, Kumar K. Three-
Pan XB. Feasibility of device closure for multiple atrial septal defects using dimensional-printed cardiac prototypes aid surgical decision-making and
3D printing and ultrasound-guided intervention technique. Zhonghua Yi preoperative planning in selected cases of complex congenital heart
Xue Za Zhi. 2017;97(16):1214–7. diseases: early experience and proof of concept in a resource-limited
5. Wang Z, Liu Y, Xu Y, Gao C, Chen Y, Luo H. Three-dimensional printing- environment. Ann Pediatr Cardiol. 2017;10(2):117–25.
guided percutaneous transcatheter closure of secundum atrial septal defect 24. Karsenty C, Hadeed K, Acar P. Congenital heart disease: recent technical advances
with rim deficiency: first-in-human series. Cardiol J. 2016;23(6):599–603. in three-dimensional echocardiography. Presse Med. 2017;46(5):482–9.
6. Wang Z, Luo H, Gao C, Xu Y. Three-dimensional printing model for the 25. Biglino G, Giardini A, Hsia T-Y, Figliola R, Taylor AM, Schievano S, MOCHA
postoperative follow-up of atrial septal defect. Int J Cardiol. 2016;222:891–2. Collaborative Group. Modeling single ventricle physiology: review of
7. Yang F, Zheng H, Lyu J, Yang X, Yang Y, Pang Y, Liang F, Zhang G, Xu Z, engineering tools to study first stage palliation of hypoplastic left heart
Jiang S, Lyu B, Meng F, Hao B. A case of transcatheter closure of inferior syndrome. Front Pediatr. 2013;1:31.
vena cava type atrial septal defect with patent ductus arteriosus occlusion 26. Kutty S, Rathod RH, Danford DA, Celermajer DS. Role of imaging in the
device guided by 3D printing technology. Zhonghua Xin Xue Guan Bing Za evaluation of single ventricle with the Fontan palliation. Heart. 2016;102(3):
Zhi. 2015;43(7):631–3. 174–83.
8. Bhatla P, Mosca RS, Tretter JT. Altering management decisions with gained 27. Smith ML, McGuinness J, O’Reilly MK, Nolke L, Murray JG, Jones JFX. The
anatomical insight from a 3D printed model of a complex ventricular septal role of 3D printing in preoperative planning for heart transplantation in
defect. Cardiol Young. 2017;27(2):377–80. complex congenital heart disease. Ir J Med Sci. 2017;186(3):753–6.
9. Bhatla P, Tretter JT, Ludomirsky A, Argilla M, Latson LA, Chakravarti S, Barker 28. Gosnell J, Pietila T, Samuel BP, Kurup HKN, Haw MP, Vettukattil JJ.
PC, Yoo S-J, McElhinney DB, Wake N, Mosca RS. Utility and scope of rapid Integration of computed tomography and three-dimensional
prototyping in patients with complex muscular ventricular septal defects or echocardiography for hybrid three-dimensional printing in congenital heart
double-outlet right ventricle: does it Alter Management decisions? Pediatr disease. J Digit Imaging. 2016;29(6):665–9.
Cardiol. 2017;38(1):103–14. 29. Olivieri L, Krieger A, Chen MY, Kim P, Kanter JP. 3D heart model guides
10. Farooqi KM, Uppu SC, Nguyen K, Srivastava S, Ko HH, Choueiter N, Wollstein A, complex stent angioplasty of pulmonary venous baffle obstruction in a
Parness IA, Narula J, Sanz J, Nielsen JC. Application of virtual three-dimensional mustard repair of D-TGA. Int J Cardiol. 2014;172(2):e297–8.
models for simultaneous visualization of Intracardiac anatomic relationships in 30. Mottl-Link S, Hübler M, Kühne T, Rietdorf U, Krueger JJ, Schnackenburg B,
double outlet right ventricle. Pediatr Cardiol. 2015;37(1):90–8. De Simone R, Berger F, Juraszek A, Meinzer HP, Karck M, Hetzer R, Wolf I.
11. Garekar S, Bharati A, Chokhandre M, Mali S, Trivedi B, Changela VP, Solanki Physical models aiding in complex congenital heart surgery. Ann Thorac
N, Gaikwad S, Agarwal V. Clinical application and multidisciplinary Surg. 2007;86:273–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2007.06.001.
assessment of three dimensional printing in double outlet right ventricle 31. Aung SC, Tan BK, Foo CL, Lee ST. Selective laser sintering: application of a
with remote ventricular septal defect. World J Pediatr Congenit Heart Surg. rapid prototyping method in craniomaxillofacial reconstructive surgery. Ann
2016;7(3):344–50. Acad Med Singap. 1999;28(5):739–43.
12. Hadeed K, Dulac Y, Acar P. Three-dimensional printing of a complex CHD to 32. Cheung LK, Wong MC, Wong LL. Refinement of facial reconstructive surgery
plan surgical repair. Cardiol Young. 2016;26(7):1432–4. by stereo-model planning. Ann R Australas Coll Dent Surg. 2002;16:129–32.
13. Ngan EM, Rebeyka IM, Ross DB, Hirji M, Wolfaardt JF, Seelaus R, Grosvenor A, 33. Schantz JT, Hutmacher DW, Lam CX, Brinkmann M, Wong KM, Lim TC, Chou
Noga ML. The rapid prototyping of anatomic models in pulmonary atresia. J N, Guldberg RE, Teoh SH. Repair of calvarial defects with customised tissue-
Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2006;132(2):264–9. engineered bone grafts II. Evaluation of cellular efficiency and efficacy in
14. Olivieri LJ, Krieger A, Loke Y-H, Nath DS, Kim PCW, Sable CA. Three- vivo. Tissue Eng. 2003;9 Suppl 1:S127–39.
dimensional printing of intracardiac defects from three-dimensional 34. Wagner JD, Baack B, Brown GA, Kelly J. Rapid 3-dimensional prototyping for
echocardiographic images: feasibility and relative accuracy. J Am Soc surgical repair of maxillofacial fractures: a technical note. J Oral Maxillofac
Echocardiogr. 2015;28(4):392–7. Surg. 2004;62(7):898–901.
35. Cao D, Yu Z, Chai G, Liu J, Mu X. Application of EH compound artificial bone 58. Tabaković SZ, Konstantinović VS, Radosavljević R, Movrin D, Hadžistević M,
material combined with computerized three-dimensional reconstruction in Hatab N. Application of computer-aided designing and rapid prototyping
craniomaxillofacial surgery. J Craniofac Surg. 2010;21(2):440–3. Technologies in Reconstruction of blowout fractures of the orbital floor. J
36. Levine JP, Patel A, Saadeh PB, Hirsch DL. Computer-aided design and Craniofac Surg. 2015;26(5):1558–63.
manufacturing in craniomaxillofacial surgery: the new state of the art. J 59. Sun L, Xiao J, Lan Y, Xiong Y, Zhang L, Zhou H, Zhang L. Reconstruction
Craniofac Surg. 2012;23(1):288–93. of the orbital fracture with enophthalmos using customized titanium
37. Cui J, Chen L, Guan X, Ye L, Wang H, Liu L. Surgical planning, three- mesh combined with Medpor. Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2015;
dimensional model surgery and preshaped implants in treatment of 33(3):272–5.
bilateral craniomaxillofacial post-traumatic deformities. J Oral Maxillofac 60. Podolsky DJ, Mainprize JG, Edwards GP, Antonyshyn OM. Patient-specific
Surg. 2014;72(6):1138.e1–14. orbital implants: development and implementation of Technology for More
38. Kaur H, Nanda A, Koli D, Verma M, Singh H, Bishnoi I, Pathak P, Gupta A. An Accurate Orbital Reconstruction. J Craniofac Surg. 2016;27(1):131–3.
alternate vista in rehabilitation of cranial defects: combining digital and manual 61. Huang L, Lin L, Wang Z, Shi B, Zhu X, Qiu Y, Huang Y, Yu X, Liao Y.
techniques to fabricate a hybrid Cranioplast. J Craniofac Surg. 2015;26(4):1313–5. Personalized reconstruction of traumatic orbital defects based on precise
39. Xie Y, Rustom LE, McDermott AM, Boerckel JD, Johnson AJ, Alleyne AG, three-dimensional orientation and measurements of the globe. J Craniofac
Hoelzle DJ. Net shape fabrication of calcium phosphate scaffolds with Surg. 2017;28(1):172–9.
multiple material domains. Biofabrication. 2016;8(1):015005. 62. Williams JV, Revington PJ. Novel use of an aerospace selective laser
40. Florentino VG, Mendonça DS, Bezerra AV, Silva Lde F, Pontes RF, Melo CV, sintering machine for rapid prototyping of an orbital blowout fracture. Int J
Mello Mde J, de Aguiar AS. Reconstruction of frontal bone with custom-made Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;39(2):182–4.
prosthesis using rapid prototyping. J Craniofac Surg. 2016;27(4):e354–6. 63. Kozakiewicz M, Elgalal M, Piotr L, Broniarczyk-Loba A, Stefanczyk L.
41. Shao H, Ke X, Liu A, Sun M, He Y, Yang X, Fu J, Liu Y, Zhang L, Yang G, Xu S, Treatment with individual orbital wall implants in humans - 1-year
Gou Z. Bone regeneration in 3D printing bioactive ceramic scaffolds with ophthalmologic evaluation. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2011;39(1):30–6.
improved tissue/material interface pore architecture in thin-wall bone 64. Li P, Tang W, Li J, Tian DW. Preliminary application of virtual simulation and
defect. Biofabrication. 2017;9(2):025003. reposition template for zygomatico-orbitomaxillary complex fracture. J
42. Gao F, Wang Q, Liu C, Xiong B, Luo T. Individualized 3D printed model-assisted Craniofac Surg. 2012;23(5):1436–9.
posterior screw fixation for the treatment of craniovertebral junction 65. Ciprandi MT, Primo BT, Gassen HT, Closs LQ, Hernandez PA, Silva AN Jr.
abnormality: a retrospective study. J Neurosurg Spine. 2017;27(1):29–34. Calcium phosphate cement in orbital reconstructions. J Craniofac Surg.
43. Edwards J, Rogers T. The accuracy and applicability of 3D modeling and 2012;23(1):145–8.
printing blunt force cranial injuries. J Forensic Sci. 2018;3(3):683–91. 66. Huang YH, Seelaus R, Zhao L, Patel PK, Cohen M. Virtual surgical planning
44. Murray DJ, Edwards G, Mainprize JG, Antonyshyn O. Optimizing craniofacial and 3D printing in prosthetic orbital reconstruction with percutaneous
osteotomies: applications of haptic and rapid prototyping technology. J implants: a technical case report. Int Med Case Rep J. 2016;9:341–5.
Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008;66(8):1766–72. 67. Herford AS, Miller M, Lauritano F, Cervino G, Signorino F, Maiorana C. The
45. Kozakiewicz M, Elgalal M, Loba P, Komuński P, Arkuszewski P, Broniarczyk- use of virtual surgical planning and navigation in the treatment of orbital
Loba A, Stefańczyk L. Clinical application of 3D pre-bent titanium implants trauma. Chin J Traumatol. 2017;20(1):9–13.
for orbital floor fractures. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2009;37(4):229–34. 68. Tetsworth K, Block S, Glatt V. Putting 3D modelling and 3D printing into
46. Li WZ, Zhang MC, Li SP, Zhang LT, Huang Y. Application of computer-aided practice: virtual surgery and preoperative planning to reconstruct complex
three-dimensional skull model with rapid prototyping technique in repair of post-traumatic skeletal deformities and defects. SICOT J. 2017;3:16.
zygomatico-orbito-maxillary complex fracture. Int J Med Robot. 2009;5(2):158–63. 69. Veit JA, Thierauf J, Egner K, Wiggenhauser S, Friedrich D, Greve J, Schuler PJ,
47. Tang W, Guo L, Long J, Wang H, Lin Y, Liu L, Tian W. Individual design and Hoffmann TK, Schramm A. Virtual planning of prosthetic treatment of the
rapid prototyping in reconstruction of orbital wall defects. J Oral Maxillofac orbit. Laryngorhinootologie. 2017;96(6):374–9.
Surg. 2010;68(3):562–70. 70. Li J, Hsu Y, Luo E, Khadka A, Hu J. Computer-aided design and
48. Herlin C, Koppe M, Béziat JL, Gleizal A. Rapid prototyping in craniofacial manufacturing and rapid prototyped nanoscale hydroxyapatite/polyamide
surgery: using a positioning guide after zygomatic osteotomy - a case (n-HA/PA) construction for condylar defect caused by mandibular angle
report. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2011;39(5):376–9. ostectomy. Aesthet Plast Surg. 2011;35(4):636–40.
49. Feng F, Wang H, Guan X, Tian W, Jing W, Long J, Tang W, Liu L. Mirror 71. Wang G, Li J, Khadka A, Hsu Y, Li W, Hu J. CAD/CAM and rapid prototyped
imaging and preshaped titanium plates in the treatment of unilateral malar titanium for reconstruction of ramus defect and condylar fracture caused by
and zygomatic arch fractures. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol mandibular reduction. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2012;
Endod. 2011;112(2):188–94. 113(3):356–61.
50. An JG, Zhang Y, He Y, Li JM. Application of 3-D skull models and guide 72. Prisman E, Haerle SK, Irish JC, Daly M, Miles B, Chan H. Value of preoperative
plates in the treatment of unilateral orbitozygomatic deformity after mandibular plating in reconstruction of the mandible. Head Neck. 2014;
fracture. Zhonghua Zheng Xing Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2011;27(2):81–5. 36(6):828–33.
51. He LS, Shang HT, Bai SZ, Bo B. Digital surgical technology in reconstruction 73. Yamada H, Nakaoka K, Horiuchi T, Kumagai K, Ikawa T, Shigeta Y, Imamura E,
of orbital frame. Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2011;46(8):452–7. Iino M, Ogawa T, Hamada Y. Mandibular reconstruction using custom-made
52. Li J, Li P, Lu H, Shen L, Tian W, Long J, Tang W. Digital design and titanium mesh tray and particulate cancellous bone and marrow harvested
individually fabricated titanium implants for the reconstruction of traumatic from bilateral posterior ilia. J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2014;48(3):183–90.
zygomatico-orbital defects. J Craniofac Surg. 2013;24(2):363–8. 74. Xu X, Deng RX, Deng SM, Yang JL, Chen J. Application of three dimensional
53. Fang JJ, Liu JK, Wu TC, Lee JW, Kuo TH. Complex facial deformity model in treatment of superolateral dislocation of mandibular condyle.
reconstruction with a surgical guide incorporating a built-in occlusal stent Zhejiang Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2014;43(5):572–6.
as the positioning reference. J Craniofac Surg. 2013;24(3):e260–5. 75. Dong Z, Li Q, Bai S, Zhang L. Application of 3-dimensional printing
54. Liu XZ, Shu DL, Ran W, Guo B, Liao X. Digital surgical templates for technology to Kirschner wire fixation of adolescent condyle fracture. J Oral
managing high-energy zygomaticomaxillary complex injuries associated Maxillofac Surg. 2015;73(10):1970–6.
with orbital volume change: a quantitative assessment. J Oral Maxillofac 76. Fowell C, Edmondson S, Martin T, Praveen P. Rapid prototyping and
Surg. 2013;71(10):1712–23. patient-specific pre-contoured reconstruction plate for comminuted
55. Ernoult C, Bouletreau P, Meyer C, Aubry S, Breton P, Bachelet JT. fractures of the mandible. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;53(10):1035–7.
Reconstruction assisted by 3D printing in maxillofacial surgery. Rev Stomatol 77. el-Gengehi M, Seif SA. Evaluation of the accuracy of computer-guided
Chir Maxillofac Chir Orale. 2015;116(2):95–102. mandibular fracture reduction. J Craniofac Surg. 2015;26(5):1587–91.
56. Park SW, Choi JW, Koh KS, Oh TS. Mirror-imaged rapid prototype skull 78. Qin M, Liu Y, Wang L, He J, Xuan M, Hua C, Li D, Jin Z, Wang X. Design and
model and pre-molded synthetic scaffold to achieve optimal orbital cavity optimization of the fixing plate for customized mandible implants. J
reconstruction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;73(8):1540–53. Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2015;43(7):1296–302.
57. D'Souza N, Mainprize J, Edwards G, Binhammer P, Antonyshyn O. Teaching 79. Qu Z, Wang Q, Feng X, Sheng L, Ma W, Qu W. Application of 3D printing
facial fracture repair: a novel method of surgical skills training using three- technique in bilateral sagittal split osteotomy. Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za
dimensional biomodels. Plast Surg (Oakv). 2015;23(2):81–6. Zhi. 2015;33(5):504–8.
80. Voss JO, Varjas V, Raguse JD, Thieme N, Richards RG, Kamer L. Computed 102. Yin L, Tang X, Shi L, Yin H, Zhang Z. Mandibular distraction combined with
tomography-based virtual fracture reduction techniques in bimandibular orthognathic techniques for the correction of severe adult mandibular
fractures. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2016;44(2):177–85. hypoplasia. J Craniofac Surg. 2014;25(6):1947–52.
81. van de Velde WL, Schepers RH, van Minnen B. The 3D-printed dental splint: 103. Mazzoni S, Bianchi A, Schiariti G, Badiali G, Marchetti C. Computer-aided
a valuable tool in the surgical treatment of malocclusion after polytrauma. design and computer-aided manufacturing cutting guides and customized
Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd. 2016;123(1):19–23. titanium plates are useful in upper maxilla waferless repositioning. J Oral
82. Yamada H, Nakaoka K, Sonoyama T, Kumagai K, Ikawa T, Shigeta Y, Harada Maxillofac Surg. 2015;73(4):701–7.
N, Kawamura N, Ogawa T, Hamada Y. Clinical usefulness of mandibular 104. Shi L, Liu W, Yin L, Feng S, Xu S, Zhang ZY. Surgical guide assistant
reconstruction using custom-made titanium mesh tray and autogenous mandibular distraction osteogenesis and sagittal split osteotomy in the
particulate cancellous bone and marrow harvested from tibia and/or Ilia. J treatment of hemifacial microsomia. J Craniofac Surg. 2015;26(2):498–500.
Craniofac Surg. 2016;27(3):586–92. 105. Xu H, Zhang C, Shim YH, Li H, Cao D. Combined use of rapid-prototyping
83. Druelle C, Touzet-Roumazeille S, Raoul G, Ferri J, Nicot R. How to produce model and surgical guide in correction of mandibular asymmetry
pre-shaped rigid arch bars using low-cost 3D printing technology- a malformation patients with normal occlusal relationship. J Craniofac Surg.
technical note. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017;118:213–6. 2015;26(2):418–21.
84. Ma J, Ma L, Wang Z, Zhu X, Wang W. The use of 3D-printed titanium mesh 106. Soleman J, Thieringer F, Beinemann J, Kunz C, Guzman R. Computer-assisted
tray in treating complex comminuted mandibular fractures: a case report. virtual planning and surgical template fabrication for frontoorbital
Medicine (Baltimore). 2017;96(27):e7250. advancement. Neurosurg Focus. 2015;38(5):E5.
85. Wu CH, Lin YS, Liu YS, Lin CL. Biomechanical evaluation of a novel hybrid 107. Li Y, Jiang Y, Ye B, Hu J, Chen Q, Zhu S. Treatment of Dentofacial
reconstruction plate for mandible segmental defects: a finite element deformities secondary to Osteochondroma of the mandibular condyle
analysis and fatigue testing. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2017;45:1671–80. using virtual surgical planning and 3-dimensional printed surgical
86. Brito NM, Soares RS, Monteiro EL, Martins SC, Cavalcante JR, Grempel RG, templates. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016;74(2):349–68.
Neto JA. Additive manufacturing for surgical planning of mandibular 108. Ying B, Ye N, Jiang Y, Liu Y, Hu J, Zhu S. Correction of facial asymmetry
fracture. Acta Stomatol Croat. 2016;50(4):348–53. associated with vertical maxillary excess and mandibular prognathism by
87. Ciocca L, Mazzoni S, Fantini M, Persiani F, Baldissara P, Marchetti C, Scotti R. combined orthognathic surgery and guiding templates and splints
A CAD/CAM-prototyped anatomical condylar prosthesis connected to a fabricated by rapid prototyping technique. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;
custom-made bone plate to support a fibula free flap. Med Biol Eng 44(11):1330–6.
Comput. 2012;50(7):743–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-012-0898-4. 109. Chai G, Tan A, Yao CA, Magee WP 3rd, Junjun P, Zhu M, Bogari M, Hsu Y, Xu
88. Lindner A, Rasse M, Wolf HP, Millesi W, Eglmeier R, Friede I. Indications and H, Zhang Y. Treating parry-Romberg syndrome using three-dimensional
use of stereolithographic skull reconstructions in oromaxillofacial surgery. scanning and printing and the anterolateral thigh dermal Adipofascial flap. J
Radiologe. 1995;35(9):578–82. Craniofac Surg. 2015;26(6):1826–9.
89. McGurk M, Amis AA, Potamianos P, Goodger NM. Rapid prototyping 110. Seres L, Kocsis A, Varga E, Raskó Z, Virág V, Bagó B, Varga E, Piffkó J. Surgery
techniques for anatomical modelling in medicine. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. on virtual model and 3-dimensional printing of a surgical wafer for the
1997;79(3):169–74. correction of a severe mandibular asymmetry. Fogorv Sz. 2015;108(2):45–52.
90. Petzold R, Zeilhofer HF, Kalender WA. Rapid protyping technology in medicine-- 111. Steinbacher DM. Three-dimensional analysis and surgical planning in
basics and applications. Comput Med Imaging Graph. 1999;23(5):277–84. Craniomaxillofacial surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;73(12 Suppl):S40–56.
91. Girod S, Teschner M, Schrell U, Kevekordes B, Girod B. Computer-aided 3-D 112. Fiaschi P, Pavanello M, Imperato A, Dallolio V, Accogli A, Capra V, Consales
simulation and prediction of craniofacial surgery: a new approach. J A, Cama A, Piatelli G. Surgical results of cranioplasty with a
Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2001;29(3):156–8. polymethylmethacrylate customized cranial implant in pediatric patients: a
92. Paeng JY, Lee JH, Lee JH, Kim MJ. Condyle as the point of rotation for 3-D single-center experience. J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2016;17(6):705–10.
planning of distraction osteogenesis for hemifacial microsomia. J 113. Di Rocco F, Szathmari A, Mottolese C. Wire fixation of internal distractor for
Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2007;35(2):91–102. cranial vault remodeling. Childs Nerv Syst. 2016;32(6):1131–3.
93. Robiony M, Salvo I, Costa F, Zerman N, Bazzocchi M, Toso F, Bandera C, 114. Ikawa T, Shigeta Y, Hirabayashi R, Hirai S, Hirai K, Harada N, Kawamura N,
Filippi S, Felice M, Politi M. Virtual reality surgical planning for maxillofacial Ogawa T. Computer assisted mandibular reconstruction using a custom-
distraction osteogenesis: the role of reverse engineering rapid prototyping made titan mesh tray and removable denture based on the top-down
and cooperative work. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007;65(6):1198–208. treatment technique. J Prosthodont Res. 2016;60(4):321–31.
94. McGurk M, Slabberti HD, Amis A, McDonald F. A preliminary report of a case 115. Lee UL, Kwon JS, Woo SH, Choi YJ. Simultaneous Bimaxillary surgery and
using an intra-oral distraction device. Br Dent J. 1997;183(2):63–6. mandibular reconstruction with a 3-dimensional printed titanium implant
95. Klammert U, Böhm H, Schweitzer T, Würzler K, Gbureck U, Reuther J, Kübler fabricated by Electron beam melting: a preliminary mechanical testing of
A. Multi-directional Le fort III midfacial distraction using an individual the printed mandible. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016;74(7):1501.e1–1501.e15.
prefabricated device. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2009;37(4):210–5. 116. Emodi O, Shilo D, Israel Y, Rachmiel A. Three-dimensional planning and
96. Zhou L, He L, Shang H, Liu G, Zhao J, Liu Y. Correction of hemifacial printing of guides and templates for reconstruction of the mandibular
microsomia with the help of mirror imaging and a rapid prototyping ramus and condyle using autogenous costochondral grafts. Br J Oral
technique: case report. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;47(6):486–8. Maxillofac Surg. 2017;55(1):102–4.
97. Olszewski R, Reychler H. Three-dimensional surgical guide for frontal-nasal- 117. Hatamleh M, Turner C, Bhamrah G, Mack G, Osher J. Improved virtual
ethmoid-vomer disjunction in Le fort III osteotomy. J Craniofac Surg. 2011; planning for Bimaxillary orthognathic surgery. J Craniofac Surg. 2016;27(6):
22(5):1791–2. e568–73.
98. Gao QW, Song HF, Xu MH, Liu CM, Chai JK. Mandibular-driven simultaneous 118. Eley KA, Watt-Smith SR, Golding SJ. ‘Black Bone’ MRI: a novel imaging
maxillo-mandibular distraction for hemifacial microsomia with rapid technique for 3D printing. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2017;46(3):20160407.
prototyping technology. Zhonghua Zheng Xing Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2013;29(6): 119. LoPresti M, Daniels B, Buchanan EP, Monson L, Lam S. Virtual surgical
431–4. planning and 3D printing in repeat calvarial vault reconstruction for
99. Seres L, Varga E Jr, Kocsis A, Rasko Z, Bago B, Varga E, Piffko J. Correction of craniosynostosis: technical note. J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2017;19(4):490–4.
a severe facial asymmetry with computerized planning and with the use of 120. Rubio-Palau J, Prieto-Gundin A, Cazalla AA, Serrano MB, Fructuoso GG,
a rapid prototyped surgical template: a case report/technique article. Head Ferrandis FP, Baró AR. Three-dimensional planning in craniomaxillofacial
Face Med. 2014;10:27. surgery. Ann Maxillofac Surg. 2016;6(2):281–6.
100. Engel M, Hoffmann J, Castrillon-Oberndorfer G, Freudlsperger C. The value 121. Wang L, Tian D, Sun X, Xiao Y, Chen L, Wu G. The precise repositioning
of three-dimensional printing modelling for surgical correction of orbital instrument for Genioplasty and a three-dimensional printing technique for
hypertelorism. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;19(1):91–5. treatment of complex facial asymmetry. Aesthet Plast Surg. 2017;41(4):919–29.
101. Kang SH, Kim MK, You TK, Lee JY. Modification of planned postoperative 122. Jiménez Ormabera B, Díez Valle R, Zaratiegui Fernández J, Llorente Ortega
occlusion in orthognathic surgery, based on computer-aided design/ M, Unamuno Iñurritegui X, Tejada Solís S. 3D printing in neurosurgery: a
computer-aided manufacturing-engineered preoperative surgical simulation. specific model for patients with craniosynostosis. Neurocirugia (Astur). 2017;
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;73(1):134–51. 28(6):260–5.
123. Salles F, Anchieta M, Costa Bezerra P, Torres ML, Queiroz E, Faber J. 146. Federspil PA. The role of auricular prostheses (Epitheses) in ear
Complete and isolated congenital aglossia: case report and treatment of reconstruction. Facial Plast Surg. 2015;31(6):626–32.
sequelae using rapid prototyping models. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 147. Mueller A, Krishnan KG, Uhl E, Mast G. The application of rapid prototyping
Oral Radiol Endod. 2008;105(3):e41–7. techniques in cranial reconstruction and preoperative planning in
124. Yu Q, Gong X, Wang GM, Yu ZY, Qian YF, Shen G. A novel technique for neurosurgery. J Craniofac Surg. 2003;14(6):899–914.
presurgical nasoalveolar molding using computer-aided reverse engineering 148. Murray DJ, Edwards G, Mainprize JG, Antonyshyn O. Advanced technology
and rapid prototyping. J Craniofac Surg. 2011;22(1):142–6. in the management of fibrous dysplasia. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2008;
125. Zgong X, Yu Q, Yu ZY, Wang GM, Qian YF. Presurgical alveolar molding 61(8):906–16.
using computer aided design in infants with unilateral complete cleft lip 149. Ching WC, Goh RC, Lin CL, Lo LJ, Chen YR. Aesthetic restoration of fronto-
and palate. Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue. 2012;21(2):180–4. orbital deformity with prefabricated implant utilizing modeling clay and
126. Gong X, Yu Q. Correction of maxillary deformity in infants with bilateral cleft rapid-prototyping technology. Aesthet Plast Surg. 2011;35(6):1176–9.
lip and palate using computer-assisted design. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral 150. Huang D, Chen M, He D, Yang C, Yuan J, Bai G, Wang Y, Wei W, Chen Z.
Pathol Oral Radiol. 2012;114(5 Suppl):S74–8. Preservation of the inferior alveolar neurovascular bundle in the osteotomy
127. Loeffelbein DJ, Rau A, Wolff KD. Impression technique for monitoring and of benign lesions of the mandible using a digital template. Br J Oral
virtual treatment planning in nasoalveolar moulding. Br J Oral Maxillofac Maxillofac Surg. 2015;53(7):637–41.
Surg. 2013;51(8):898–901. 151. Darwood A, Collier J, Joshi N, Grant WE, Sauret-Jackson V, Richards
128. Wang J, Liu JF, Liu W, Wang JC, Wang SY, Gui L. Application of computer R, Dawood A, Kirkpatrick N. Re-thinking 3D printing: a novel
techniques in repair of oblique facial clefts with outer-table calvarial bone approach to guided facial contouring. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2015;
grafts. J Craniofac Surg. 2013;24(3):957–60. 43(7):1256–60.
129. Zheng Y, Zhang D, Qin T, Wu G. Correction of nasal deformity in infants 152. Kang SJ, Oh MJ, Jeon SP. A novel and easy approach for contouring surgery in
with unilateral cleft lip and palate using multiple digital techniques. J patients with craniofacial fibrous dysplasia. J Craniofac Surg. 2015;26(6):1977–8.
Prosthet Dent. 2016;115(6):788–91. 153. Nahumi N, Shohet MR, Bederson JB, Elahi E. Frontorbital fibrous dysplasia
130. Ritschl LM, Rau A, Güll FD, diBora B, Wolff KD, Schönberger M, Bauer FX, resection and reconstruction with custom Polyetherlatone Alloplast. J
Wintermantel E, Loeffelbein DJ. Pitfalls and solutions in virtual design of Craniofac Surg. 2015;26(8):e720–2.
nasoalveolar molding plates by using CAD/CAM technology--a preliminary 154. Pan J, Ye B, Hu J, Li X, Zhang Y, Li J. Application of reverse engineering
clinical study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2016;44(4):453–9. template for the correction of asymmetric deformity of maxillofacial fibrous
131. Cho MJ, Kane AA, Hallac RR, Gangopadhyay N, Seaward JR. Liquid latex dysplasia. J Craniofac Surg. 2016;27(2):e154–7.
molding: a novel application of 3D printing to facilitate flap design. Cleft 155. Wang R, Li G, Liu C, Jia C, Han Y. Three-dimensional printing of reduction
Palate Craniofac J. 2017;54(4):453–6. template in the contouring of craniofacial fibrous dysplasia. J Craniofac
132. Lioufas PA, Quayle MR, Leong JC, McMenamin PG. 3D printed models of Surg. 2016;27(7):1792–4.
cleft palate pathology for surgical education. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob 156. Eisenmenger LB, Wiggins RH 3rd, Fults DW 3rd, Huo EJ. Application of 3D
Open. 2016;4(9):e1029. printing in a case of osteogenesis imperfecta for patient education,
133. Du F, Li B, Yin N, Cao Y, Wang Y. Volumetric analysis of alveolar bone defect anatomic understanding, preoperative planning, and intraoperative
using three-dimensional-printed models versus computer-aided evaluation. World Neurosurg. 2017;107:1049.e1–7.
engineering. J Craniofac Surg. 2017;28(2):383–6. 157. Bill JS, Reuther JF. Rapid prototyping in planning reconstructive surgery of
134. Wu Y, Wang G, Yang Y, Chen Y. Application of computer-aided design and the head and neck. Review and evaluation of indications in clinical use.
customized implants in the reconstruction of pyriform aperture defects Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir. 2004;8(3):135–53.
secondary to unilateral cleft lip and palate. J Craniofac Surg. 2017;28:1517–20. 158. Poukens J, Haex J, Riediger D. The use of rapid prototyping in the
135. Nicot R, Couly G, Ferri J, Levaillant JM. Three-dimensional printed haptic preoperative planning of distraction osteogenesis of the cranio-maxillofacial
model from a prenatal surface-rendered oropalatal sonographic view: a new skeleton. Comput Aided Surg. 2003;8(3):146–54.
tool in the surgical planning of cleft lip/palate. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 159. Mavili ME, Canter HI, Saglam-Aydinatay B, Kamaci S, Kocadereli I. Use of
2017;47:44–7. three-dimensional medical modeling methods for precise planning of
136. Klein M, Hein A, Lueth T, Bier J. Robot-assisted placement of craniofacial orthognathic surgery. J Craniofac Surg. 2007;18(4):740–7.
implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003;18(5):712–8. 160. Metzger MC, Hohlweg-Majert B, Schwarz U, Teschner M, Hammer B,
137. Hatamleh MM, Watson J. Construction of an implant-retained auricular Schmelzeisen R. Manufacturing splints for orthognathic surgery using a
prosthesis with the aid of contemporary digital technologies: a clinical three-dimensional printer. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol
report. J Prosthodont. 2013;22(2):132–6. Endod. 2008;105(2):e1–7.
138. Watson J, Hatamleh MM. Complete integration of technology for improved 161. Robiony M, Salvo I, Costa F, Zerman N, Bandera C, Filippi S, Felice M, Politi
reproduction of auricular prostheses. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;111(5):430–6. M. Accuracy of virtual reality and stereolithographic models in maxillo-facial
139. Chen ZC, Albdour MN, Lizardo JA, Chen YA, Chen PK. Precision of three- surgical planning. J Craniofac Surg. 2008;19(2):482–9.
dimensional stereo-photogrammetry (3dMDTM) in anthropometry of the 162. Ibrahim D, Broilo TL, Heitz C, de Oliveira MG, de Oliveira HW, Nobre SM, Dos
auricle and its application in microtia reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Santos Filho JH, Silva DN. Dimensional error of selective laser sintering,
Aesthet Surg. 2015;68(5):622–31. three-dimensional printing and PolyJet models in the reproduction of
140. Berens AM, Newman S, Bhrany AD, Murakami C, Sie KC, Zopf DA. mandibular anatomy. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2009;37(3):167–73.
Computer-aided design and 3D printing to produce a costal cartilage 163. Edwards SP. Computer-assisted craniomaxillofacial surgery. Oral Maxillofac
model for simulation of auricular reconstruction. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Clin North Am. 2010;22(1):117–34.
Surg. 2016;155(2):356–9. 164. Olszewski R, Tranduy K, Reychler H. Innovative procedure for
141. Thomas DJ. Could 3D bioprinted tissues offer future hope for microtia computer-assisted genioplasty: three-dimensional cephalometry,
treatment? Int J Surg. 2016;32:43–4. rapid-prototyping model and surgical splint. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg.
142. Zhu P, Chen S. Clinical outcomes following ear reconstruction with adjuvant 2010;39(7):721–4.
3D template model. Acta Otolaryngol. 2016;136(12):1236–41. 165. Freitas EP, Rahal SC, Teixeira CR, Silva JV, Noritomi PY, Villela CH, Yamashita
143. Jeon B, Lee C, Kim M, Choi TH, Kim S, Kim S. Fabrication of three- S. Rapid prototyping and inclined plane technique in the treatment of
dimensional scan-to-print ear model for microtia reconstruction. J Surg Res. maxillofacial malformations in a fox. Can Vet J. 2010;51(3):267–70.
2016;206(2):490–7. 166. Kim BC, Lee CE, Park W, Kim MK, Zhengguo P, Yu HS, Yi CK, Lee SH. Clinical
144. Flores RL, Liss H, Raffaelli S, Humayun A, Khouri KS, Coelho PG, Witek L. The experiences of digital model surgery and the rapid-prototyped wafer for
technique for 3D printing patient-specific models for auricular maxillary orthognathic surgery. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol
reconstruction. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2017;45(6):937–43. Endod. 2011;111(3):278–85.
145. Chen HY, Ng LS, Chang CS, Lu TC, Chen NH, Chen ZC. Pursuing Mirror 167. Bai S, Bo B, Bi Y, Wang B, Zhao J, Liu Y, Feng Z, Shang H, Zhao Y. CAD/CAM
image reconstruction in unilateral Microtia: customizing auricular framework surface templates as an alternative to the intermediate wafer in
by application of three-dimensional imaging and three-dimensional orthognathic surgery. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod.
printing. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017;139(6):1433–43. 2010;110(5):e1–7.
168. Li B, Zhang L, Sun H, Yuan J, Shen SG, Wang X. A novel method of 190. Suomalainen A, Stoor P, Mesimäki K, Kontio RK. Rapid prototyping
computer aided orthognathic surgery using individual CAD/CAM templates: modelling in oral and maxillofacial surgery: a two year retrospective study. J
a combination of osteotomy and repositioning guides. Br J Oral Maxillofac Clin Exp Dent. 2015;7(5):e605–12.
Surg. 2013;51(8):e239–44. 191. Pfaff MJ, Steinbacher DM. Plastic surgery applications using three-
169. Sun H, Li B, Zhao Z, Zhang L, Shen SG, Wang X. Error analysis of a CAD/ dimensional planning and computer-assisted design and manufacturing.
CAM method for unidirectional mandibular distraction osteogenesis in the Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;137(3):603e–16e.
treatment of hemifacial microsomia. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013;51(8): 192. Resnick CM, Inverso G, Wrzosek M, Padwa BL, Kaban LB, Peacock ZS. Is there
892–7. a difference in cost between standard and virtual surgical planning for
170. Smith EJ, Anstey JA, Venne G, Ellis RE. Using additive manufacturing in orthognathic surgery? J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016;74(9):1827–33.
accuracy evaluation of reconstructions from computed tomography. Proc 193. Li B, Wei HP, Jiang TF, Shen SY, Shen GF, Wang XD. Clinical
Inst Mech Eng H. 2013;227(5):551–9. application and accuracy of the genioplasty surgical templates system
171. Adolphs N, Liu W, Keeve E, Hoffmeister B. Craniomaxillofacial surgery for osseous genioplasty. Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2016;
planning based on 3D models derived from cone-beam CT data. Comput 51(11):646–50.
Aided Surg. 2013;18(5–6):101–8. 194. Shaheen E, Sun Y, Jacobs R, Politis C. Three-dimensional printed final
172. Al-Ahmad HT, M Saleh MW, Hussein AM. Evaluation of an innovative occlusal splint for orthognathic surgery: design and validation. Int J Oral
computer-assisted sagittal split ramus osteotomy to reduce neurosensory Maxillofac Surg. 2017;46(1):67–71.
alterations following orthognathic surgery: a pilot study. Int J Med Robot. 195. Chen X, Li X, Xu L, Sun Y, Politis C, Egger J. Development of a computer-
2013;9(2):134–41. aided design software for dental splint in orthognathic surgery. Sci Rep.
173. Salvato G, Chiavenna C, Meazzini MC. Guide surgery osteotomy system 2016;6:38867.
(GSOS) a new device for treatment in orthognathic surgery. J 196. Legocki AT, Duffy-Peter A, Scott AR. Benefits and limitations of entry-level 3-
Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2014;42(3):234–8. dimensional printing of maxillofacial skeletal models. JAMA Otolaryngol
174. Abdel-Moniem Barakat A, Abou-ElFetouh A, Hakam MM, El-Hawary H, Head Neck Surg. 2017;143(4):389–94.
Abdel-Ghany KM. Clinical and radiographic evaluation of a computer- 197. Stokbro K, Aagaard E, Torkov P, Bell RB, Thygesen T. Surgical accuracy of
generated guiding device in bilateral sagittal split osteotomies. J three-dimensional virtual planning: a pilot study of bimaxillary orthognathic
Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2014;42(5):e195–203. procedures including maxillary segmentation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg.
175. Sun Y, Luebbers HT, Agbaje JO, Schepers S, Vrielinck L, Lambrichts I, Politis 2016;45(1):8–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2015.07.010.
C. Accuracy of upper jaw positioning with intermediate splint fabrication 198. Li B, Shen S, Jiang W, Li J, Jiang T, Xia JJ, Shen SG, Wang X. A new approach
after virtual planning in bimaxillary orthognathic surgery. J Craniofac Surg. of splint-less orthognathic surgery using a personalized orthognathic
2013;24(6):1871–6. surgical guide system: a preliminary study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017;
176. Cousley RR, Turner MJ. Digital model planning and computerized 46(10):1298–305.
fabrication of orthognathic surgery wafers. J Orthod. 2014;41(1):38–45. 199. Xiao Y, Sun X, Wang L, Zhang Y, Chen K, Wu G. The application of 3D
177. Adolphs N, Liu W, Keeve E, Hoffmeister B. RapidSplint: virtual splint printing Technology for Simultaneous Orthognathic Surgery and
generation for orthognathic surgery - results of a pilot series. Comput Aided Mandibular Contour Osteoplasty in the treatment of craniofacial deformities.
Surg. 2014;19(1–3):20–8. Aesthet Plast Surg. 2017;41(6):1413–24.
178. Zhu M, Chai G, Li Q. Application of three-dimensional printing technique in 200. Egger J, Wallner J, Gall M, Chen X, Schwenzer-Zimmerer K, Reinbacher K,
correction of mandibular prognathism. Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Schmalstieg D. Computer-aided position planning of miniplates to treat
Ke Za Zhi. 2014;28(3):296–9. facial bone defects. PLoS One. 2017;12(8):e0182839.
179. Shqaidef A, Ayoub AF, Khambay BS. How accurate are rapid prototyped (RP) 201. Lim SH, Kim MK, Kang SH. Genioplasty using a simple CAD/CAM (computer-
final orthognathic surgical wafers? A pilot study. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. aided design and computer-aided manufacturing) surgical guide. Maxillofac
2014;52(7):609–14. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015;37(1):44. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40902-015-0044-y.
180. Kang SH, Kim MK, Kim BC, Lee SH. Orthognathic Y-splint: a CAD/CAM- 202. Hou JS, Chen M, Pan CB, Tao Q, Wang JG, Wang C, Zhang B, Huang HZ.
engineered maxillary repositioning wafer assembly. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. Immediate reconstruction of bilateral mandible defects: management based
2014;52(7):667–9. on computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing rapid
181. Ye N, Long H, Zhu S, Yang Y, Lai W, Hu J. The accuracy of computer image- prototyping technology in combination with vascularized fibular
guided template for mandibular angle Ostectomy. Aesthet Plast Surg. 2015; osteomyocutaneous flap. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011;69(6):1792–7.
39(1):117–23. 203. Lethaus B, Poort L, Böckmann R, Smeets R, Tolba R, Kessler P. Additive
182. Li Y, Jiang Y, Zhang N, Xu R, Hu J, Zhu S. Clinical feasibility and efficacy of manufacturing for microvascular reconstruction of the mandible in 20
using virtual surgical planning in bimaxillary orthognathic surgery without patients. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2012;40(1):43–6.
intermediate splint. J Craniofac Surg. 2015;26(2):501–5. 204. Rohner D, Guijarro-Martínez R, Bucher P, Hammer B. Importance of patient-
183. Cassetta M, Pandolfi S, Giansanti M. Minimally invasive corticotomy in specific intraoperative guides in complex maxillofacial reconstruction. J
orthodontics: a new technique using a CAD/CAM surgical template. Int J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2013;41(5):382–90.
Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;44(7):830–3. 205. Man QW, Jia J, Liu K, Chen G, Liu B. Secondary reconstruction for
184. Lee UL, Kwon JS, Choi YJ. Keyhole system: a computer-assisted designed and mandibular osteoradionecrosis defect with fibula osteomyocutaneous flap
computer-assisted manufactured Maxillomandibular complex Repositioner in flowthrough from radial forearm flap using stereolithographic 3-dimensional
orthognathic surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;73(10):2024–9. printing modeling technology. J Craniofac Surg. 2015;26(2):e190–3.
185. Choi JW, Kim N. Clinical application of three-dimensional printing 206. Inzana JA, Trombetta RP, Schwarz EM, Kates SL, Awad HA. 3D printed
technology in craniofacial plastic surgery. Arch Plast Surg. 2015;42(3):267–77. bioceramics for dual antibiotic delivery to treat implant-associated bone
186. Fang C, Fang Z, Fan Y, Li J, Xiang F, Tao H. Application of 3D visualization, infection. Eur Cell Mater. 2015;30:232–47.
3D printing and 3D laparoscopy in the diagnosis and surgical treatment of 207. Wu W, Ye C, Zheng Q, Wu G, Cheng Z. A therapeutic delivery system for
hepatic tumors. Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao. 2015;35(5):639–45. chronic osteomyelitis via a multi-drug implant based on three-dimensional
187. Mendez BM, Chiodo MV, Patel PA. Customized in-Office' three-dimensional printing technology. J Biomater Appl. 2016;31(2):250–60.
printing for virtual surgical planning in craniofacial surgery. J Craniofac Surg. 208. Mercuri LG, Wolford LM, Sanders B, White RD, Hurder A, Henderson W.
2015;26(5):1584–6. Custom CAD/CAM total temporomandibular joint reconstruction system:
188. He W, Tian K, Xie X, Wang X, Li Y, Wang X, Li Z. Individualized surgical templates preliminary multicenter report. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1995;53(2):106–15.
and titanium microplates for Le fort I osteotomy by computer-aided design and 209. Undt G, Wild K, Reuther G, Ewers R. MRI-based stereolithographic models of
computer-aided manufacturing. J Craniofac Surg. 2015;26(6):1877–81. the temporomandibular joint: technical innovation. J Craniomaxillofac Surg.
189. Lee JW, Lim SH, Kim MK, Kang SH. Precision of a CAD/CAM-engineered 2000;28(5):258–63.
surgical template based on a facebow for orthognathic surgery: an 210. Mercuri LG, Wolford LM, Sanders B, White RD, Giobbie-Hurder A. Long-term
experiment with a rapid prototyping maxillary model. Oral Surg Oral Med follow-up of the CAD/CAM patient fitted total temporomandibular joint
Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2015;120(6):684–92. reconstruction system. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2002;60(12):1440–8.
211. Xia JJ, Gateno J, Teichgraeber JF. Three-dimensional computer-aided 235. Ryu J, Cho J, Kim HM. Bilateral temporomandibular joint replacement using
surgical simulation for maxillofacial surgery. Atlas Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin computer-assisted surgical simulation and three-dimensional printing. J
North Am. 2005;13(1):25–39. Craniofac Surg. 2016;27(5):e450–2.
212. Keith DA. Custom-made total temporomandibular joint prostheses. Atlas 236. Pho Duc JM, Hüning SV, Grossi ML. Parallel randomized controlled clinical
Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2005;13(1):83–9. trial in patients with temporomandibular disorders treated with a CAD/CAM
213. van der Wal KG. Dissertations 25 years after the date 7. Temporomandibular versus a conventional stabilization splint. Int J Prosthodont. 2016;29(4):340–
joint ankylosis. Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd. 2005;112(10):380–4. 50.
214. Christensen RW, Walker CR, Dollar JV. New hope for Treacher-Collins 237. Sawh-Martinez R, Parsaei Y, Wu R, Lin A, Metzler P, DeSesa C, Steinbacher
syndrome: a surgical case report. Surg Technol Int. 2005;14:319–27. DM. Improved temporomandibular joint position after 3-dimensional
215. Worrall SF, Christensen RW. Alloplastic reconstruction of the planned mandibular reconstruction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017;75(1):197–
temporomandibular joint in treatment of craniofacial developmental or 206.
congenital anomalies: a surgical case report. Surg Technol Int. 2006;15:291–301. 238. Tarsitano A, Battaglia S, Ramieri V, Cascone P, Ciocca L, Scotti R, Marchetti C.
216. Lee JW, Fang JJ, Chang LR, Yu CK. Mandibular defect reconstruction with Short-term outcomes of mandibular reconstruction in oncological patients
the help of mirror imaging coupled with laser stereolithographic modeling using a CAD/CAM prosthesis including a condyle supporting a fibular free
technique. J Formos Med Assoc. 2007;106(3):244–50. flap. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2017;45(2):330–7.
217. Mercuri LG, Edibam NR, Giobbie-Hurder A. Fourteen-year follow-up of a 239. Ritschl LM, Mücke T, Fichter A, Güll FD, Schmid C, Duc JMP, Kesting MR,
patient-fitted total temporomandibular joint reconstruction system. J Oral Wolff KD, Loeffelbein DJ. Functional outcome of CAD/CAM-assisted versus
Maxillofac Surg. 2007;65(6):1140–8. conventional microvascular, fibular free flap reconstruction of the mandible:
218. Pearce CS, Cooper C, Speculand B. One stage management of ankylosis of a retrospective study of 30 cases. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2017;33(4):281–91.
the temporomandibular joint with a custom-made total joint replacement 240. Ackland DC, Robinson D, Redhead M, Lee PV, Moskaljuk A, Dimitroulis G. A
system. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;47(7):530–4. personalized 3D-printed prosthetic joint replacement for the human
219. Chaware SM, Bagaria V, Kuthe A. Application of the rapid prototyping temporomandibular joint: from implant design to implantation. J Mech
technique to design a customized temporomandibular joint used to treat Behav Biomed Mater. 2017;69:404–11.
temporomandibular ankylosis. Indian J Plast Surg. 2009;42(1):85–93. 241. Farzad P. Reconstruction of nongrowing hemifacial microsomia patient with
220. Bell RB. Computer planning and intraoperative navigation in cranio- custom-made unilateral temporomandibular joint total joint prosthesis and
maxillofacial surgery. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2010;22(1):135–56. orthognathic surgery. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2017;7(1):62–6.
221. Zizelmann C, Bucher P, Rohner D, Gellrich NC, Kokemueller H, Hammer B. 242. Hu Y, Zhang L, He D, Yang C, Chen M, Zhang S, Li H, Ellis Iii E. Simultaneous
Virtual restoration of anatomic jaw relationship to obtain a precise 3D treatment of temporomandibular joint ankylosis with severe mandibular
model for total joint prosthesis construction for treatment of TMJ ankylosis deficiency by standard TMJ prosthesis. Sci Rep. 2017;7:45271.
with open bite. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;39(10):1012–5. 243. Kozakiewicz M, Wach T, Szymor P, Zieliński R. Two different techniques of
222. Chandran R, Keeler GD, Christensen AM, Weimer KA, Caloss R. Application of manufacturing TMJ replacements - a technical report. J Craniomaxillofac
virtual surgical planning for total joint reconstruction with a stock alloplast Surg. 2017;5(9):1432–7.
system. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011;69(1):285–94. 244. Ciocca L, Marchetti C, Mazzoni S, Baldissara P, Gatto MR, Cipriani R, Scotti R,
223. Zhang S, Liu X, Xu Y, Yang C, Undt G, Chen M, Haddad MS, Yun B. Tarsitano A. Accuracy of fibular sectioning and insertion into a rapid-
Application of rapid prototyping for temporomandibular joint prototyped bone plate, for mandibular reconstruction using CAD-CAM
reconstruction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011;69(2):432–8. technology. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2015;43(1):28–33.
224. Keller EE, Baltali E, Liang X, Zhao K, Huebner M, An KN. Temporomandibular 245. Chen MJ, Yang C, Huang D, He DM, Wang YW, Zhang WH. Modified technique
custom hemijoint replacement prosthesis: prospective clinical and kinematic for preservation of inferior alveolar nerve during mandibulectomy. Head Neck.
study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012;70(2):276–88. 2017;39(12):2562–6. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.24924.
225. Patel A, Otterburn D, Saadeh P, Levine J, Hirsch DL. 3D volume assessment 246. Eckardt A, Swennen GR. Virtual planning of composite mandibular
techniques and computer-aided design and manufacturing for preoperative reconstruction with free fibula bone graft. J Craniofac Surg. 2005;16(6):1137–40.
fabrication of implants in head and neck reconstruction. Facial Plast Surg 247. Westendorff C, Kaminsky J, Ernemann U, Reinert S, Hoffmann J. Image-
Clin North Am. 2011;19(4):683–709. guided sphenoid wing meningioma resection and simultaneous computer-
226. Gelesko S, Markiewicz MR, Weimer K, Bell RB. Computer-aided orthognathic assisted cranio-orbital reconstruction: technical case report. Neurosurgery.
surgery. Atlas Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2012;20(1):107–18. 2007;60(2 Suppl 1):ONSE173–4.
227. Deshmukh TR, Kuthe AM, Chaware SM, Bagaria V, Ingole DS. A novel rapid 248. Hu YJ, Hardianto A, Li SY, Zhang ZY, Zhang CP. Reconstruction of a
prototyping and finite element method-based development of the patient- palatomaxillary defect with vascularized iliac bone combined with a
specific temporomandibular joint implant. Comput Methods Biomech superficial inferior epigastric artery flap and zygomatic implants as
Biomed Engin. 2012;15(4):363–70. anchorage. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007;36(9):854–7.
228. Marinescu C. CAD/CAM restorative principles. Dent Today. 2012;31(4):130 132-3. 249. Xu X, Ping FY, Chen J, Yan FG, Mao HQ, Shi YH, Zhao ZY. Application of
229. Gonçalves JR, Gomes LC, Vianna AP, Rodrigues DB, Gonçalves DA, Wolford CAD/CAM techniques in mandible large-scale defect and reconstruction
LM. Airway space changes after maxillomandibular counterclockwise with vascularized fibular bone graft. Zhejiang Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban.
rotation and mandibular advancement with TMJ concepts total joint 2007;36(5):498–502.
prostheses: three-dimensional assessment. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013; 250. Singare S, Liu Y, Li D, Lu B, Wang J, He S. Individually prefabricated
42(8):1014–22. prosthesis for maxilla Reconstuction. J Prosthodont. 2008;17(2):135–40.
230. Villegas C, Janakiraman N, Nanda R, Uribe F. Management of unilateral 251. Xu X, Ping FY, Chen J, Yan JL, Yan FG. Application of computer aided
condylar hyperplasia with a high condylectomy, skeletal anchorage, and a design/computer aided manufactured techniques in mandible defect
CAD/CAM alloplast. J Clin Orthod. 2013;47(6):365–74. reconstruction. Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2007;42(8):492–5.
231. Schneider R, Burton R. Coordinated reconstruction with bilateral condylar 252. Wu CT, Lee ST, Chen JF, Lin KL, Yen SH. Computer-aided design for three-
replacement and dental implant rehabilitation: a clinical report. J Prosthet dimensional titanium mesh used for repairing skull base bone defect in
Dent. 2014;111(2):101–6. pediatric neurofibromatosis type 1. A novel approach combining
232. Haq J, Patel N, Weimer K, Matthews NS. Single stage treatment of ankylosis of biomodeling and neuronavigation. Pediatr Neurosurg. 2008;44(2):133–9.
the temporomandibular joint using patient-specific total joint replacement 253. Cohen A, Laviv A, Berman P, Nashef R, Abu-Tair J. Mandibular reconstruction
and virtual surgical planning. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014;52(4):350–5. using stereolithographic 3-dimensional printing modeling technology. Oral
233. Rodrigues DB, Wolford LM, Malaquias P, Campos PS. Concomitant treatment Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009;108(5):661–6.
of mandibular ameloblastoma and bilateral temporomandibular joint 254. Juergens P, Krol Z, Zeilhofer HF, Beinemann J, Schicho K, Ewers R, Klug C.
osteoarthritis with bone graft and total joint prostheses. J Oral Maxillofac Computer simulation and rapid prototyping for the reconstruction of the
Surg. 2015;73(1):63–74. mandible. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;67(10):2167–70.
234. Green JM 3rd, Lawson ST, Liacouras PC, Wise EM, Gentile MA, Grant GT. 255. Tong D, Huang MW, Zhang JG, Feng HL, Li YS. Clinical application of
Custom anatomical 3D spacer for temporomandibular joint resection and computer-aided design and rapid prototyping technique for radioactive
reconstruction. Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr. 2016;9(1):82–7. seeds contained maxillary device. Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao. 2010;42(1):63–6.
256. Matsuo A, Chiba H, Takahashi H, Toyoda J, Abukawa H. Clinical application of a 277. Shengwei H, Zhiyong W, Qingang H, Wei H. Combined use of an
custom-made bioresorbable raw particulate hydroxyapatite/poly-L-lactide anterolateral thigh flap and rapid prototype modeling to reconstruct
mesh tray for mandibular reconstruction. Odontology. 2010;98(1):85–8. maxillary oncologic resections and midface defects. J Craniofac Surg. 2014;
257. Cheng HT, Wu CI, Tseng CS, Chen HC, Lee WS, Chen PK, Chang SC. The 25(4):1147–9.
occlusion-adjusted prefabricated 3D mirror image templates by computer 278. Kim MS, Lee JY, Shin SW. Fabricating an obturator using rapid prototyping
simulation: the image-guided navigation system application in difficult to design the framework: a case report. Int J Prosthodont. 2014;27(5):439–
cases of head and neck reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2009;63(5):517–21. 41.
258. Zhou LB, Shang HT, He LS, Bo B, Liu GC, Liu YP, Zhao JL. Accurate 279. Jiao T, Zhu C, Dong X, Gu X. Rehabilitation of maxillectomy defects with
reconstruction of discontinuous mandible using a reverse engineering/ obturator prostheses fabricated using computer-aided design and rapid
computer-aided design/rapid prototyping technique: a preliminary clinical prototyping: a pilot study. Int J Prosthodont. 2014;27(5):480–6.
study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;68(9):2115–21. 280. Berrone M, Crosetti E, Succo G. Repositioning template for mandibular
259. Roser SM, Ramachandra S, Blair H, Grist W, Carlson GW, Christensen AM, reconstruction with fibular free flaps: an alternative technique to pre-plating
Weimer KA, Steed MB. The accuracy of virtual surgical planning in free and virtual surgical planning. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2014;34(4):278–82.
fibula mandibular reconstruction: comparison of planned and final results. J 281. Azuma M, Yanagawa T, Ishibashi-Kanno N, Uchida F, Ito T, Yamagata K,
Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;68(11):2824–32. Hasegawa S, Sasaki K, Adachi K, Tabuchi K, Sekido M, Bukawa H. Mandibular
260. Hou JS, Chen M, Pan CB, Wang M, Wang JG, Zhang B, Tao Q, Wang C, reconstruction using plates prebent to fit rapid prototyping 3-dimensional
Huang HZ. Application of CAD/CAM-assisted technique with surgical printing models ameliorates contour deformity. Head Face Med. 2014;10:45.
treatment in reconstruction of the mandible. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2012; 282. Cornelius CP, Smolka W, Giessler GA, Wilde F, Probst FA. Patient-specific
40(8):e432–7. reconstruction plates are the missing link in computer-assisted mandibular
261. Ciocca L, Mazzoni S, Fantini M, Marchetti C, Scotti R. The design and rapid reconstruction: a showcase for technical description. J Craniomaxillofac
prototyping of surgical guides and bone plates to support iliac free flaps for Surg. 2015;43(5):624–9.
mandible reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;129(5):859e–61e. 283. Reiser V, Alterman M, Shuster A, Kleinman S, Shlomi B, Yanko-Arzi R, Zaretski
262. Ciocca L, Mazzoni S, Fantini M, Persiani F, Marchetti C, Scotti R. CAD/CAM A, Amir A, Fliss DM. V-stand--a versatile surgical platform for oromandibular
guided secondary mandibular reconstruction of a discontinuity defect after reconstruction using a 3-dimensional virtual modeling system. J Oral
ablative cancer surgery. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2012;40(8):e511–5. Maxillofac Surg. 2015;73(6):1211–26.
263. Zheng GS, Su YX, Liao GQ, Chen ZF, Wang L, Jiao PF, Liu HC, Zhong YQ, 284. Kääriäinen M, Kuuskeri M, Gremoutis G, Kuokkanen H, Miettinen A, Laranne
Zhang TH, Liang YJ. Mandible reconstruction assisted by preoperative J. Utilization of three-dimensional computer-aided preoperative virtual
virtual surgical simulation. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2012; planning and manufacturing in maxillary and mandibular reconstruction
113(5):604–11. with a microvascular fibula flap. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2016;32(2):137–41.
264. Yu HB, Zhang SL, Wang XD, Lin YP, Wang CT, Shen GF. Application of computer- 285. Chen XB, Liu ZG, Yuan JB, Tian HW. Application of three-dimensional virtual
assisted navigation in oral and maxillofacial surgery: retrospective analysis of 104 technology in mandibular defects reconstruction with free fibular flap.
consecutive cases. Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue. 2012;21(4):416–21. Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue. 2015;24(4):460–4.
265. Wang WH, Zhu J, Deng JY, Xia B, Xu B. Three-dimensional virtual technology in 286. Liu J, Zhang B, Yan D, Yu X, Lin M, Li Z, Yin Y, Xu Z. Digital and three-
reconstruction of mandibular defect including condyle using double-barrel demention print technique in reconstruction for complex defect after
vascularized fibula flap. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2013;41(5):417–22. resection of jaw neoplasms. Zhonghua Er Bi Yan Hou Tou Jing Wai Ke Za
266. Yu H, Shen SG, Wang X, Zhang L, Zhang S. The indication and application Zhi. 2015;50(6):473–6.
of computer-assisted navigation in oral and maxillofacial surgery-Shanghai's 287. Nkenke E, Agaimy A, Vairaktaris E, Lell M, von Wilmowsky C, Eitner S. Case
experience based on 104 cases. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2013;41(8):770–4. history report: immediate rehabilitation with a prefabricated fibula flap
267. Thomas CV, McMillan KG, Jeynes P, Martin T, Parmar S. Use of a titanium following removal of a locally aggressive maxillary tumor. Int J Prosthodont.
cutting guide to assist with raising and inset of a DCIA free flap. Br J Oral 2016;29(1):53–8.
Maxillofac Surg. 2013;51(8):958–61. 288. Yu Y, Zhang WB, Wang Y, Liu XJ, Guo CB, Peng X. A revised approach for
268. Bullock P, Dunaway D, McGurk L, Richards R. Integration of image guidance mandibular reconstruction with the vascularized iliac crest flap using virtual
and rapid prototyping technology in craniofacial surgery. Int J Oral surgical planning and surgical navigation. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016;74(6):
Maxillofac Surg. 2013;42(8):970–3. 1285.e1–1285.e11.
269. Coppen C, Weijs W, Bergé SJ, Maal TJ. Oromandibular reconstruction using 3D 289. Anchieta MV, Salles FA, Cassaro BD, Quaresma MM, Santos BF. Skull
planned triple template method. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013;71(8):e243–7. reconstruction after resection of bone tumors in a single surgical time by
270. Yan G, Wang X, Tan X, Wang X, Yang M, Lu L. Study on accuracy of virtual the association of the techniques of rapid prototyping and surgical
surgical planning in free fibula mandibular reconstruction by using navigation. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2016;11(10):1919–25.
SurgiCase software. Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2013;27(8): 290. Chang EI, Hanasono MM. State-of-the-art reconstruction of midface and
1006–9. facial deformities. J Surg Oncol. 2016;113(8):962–70.
271. Matros E, Albornoz CR, Rensberger M, Weimer K, Garfein ES. Computer- 291. Shui W, Zhou M, Chen S, Pan Z, Deng Q, Yao Y, Pan H, He T, Wang X. The
assisted design and computer-assisted modeling technique optimization production of digital and printed resources from multiple modalities using
and advantages over traditional methods of osseous flap reconstruction. J visualization and three-dimensional printing techniques. Int J Comput Assist
Reconstr Microsurg. 2014;30(5):289–96. Radiol Surg. 2017;12(1):13–23.
272. Ciocca L, Scotti R. Oculo-facial rehabilitation after facial cancer removal: 292. Brandmeir NJ, McInerney J, Zacharia BE. The use of custom 3D printed
updated CAD/CAM procedures: a pilot study. Prosthetics Orthot Int. 2014; stereotactic frames for laser interstitial thermal ablation: technical note.
38(6):505–9. Neurosurg Focus. 2016;41(4):E3.
273. Bai G, He D, Yang C, Lu C, Huang D, Chen M, Yuan J. Effect of digital 293. Wiedermann JP, Joshi AS, Jamshidi A, Conchenour C, Preciado D. Utilization
template in the assistant of a giant condylar osteochondroma resection. J of a submental island flap and 3D printed model for skull base
Craniofac Surg. 2014;25(3):e301–4. reconstruction: infantile giant cranio-cervicofacial teratoma. Int J Pediatr
274. Succo G, Berrone M, Battiston B, Tos P, Goia F, Appendino P, Crosetti E. Otorhinolaryngol. 2017;92:143–5.
Step-by-step surgical technique for mandibular reconstruction with fibular 294. Leiggener C, Messo E, Thor A, Zeilhofer HF, Hirsch JM. A selective laser
free flap: application of digital technology in virtual surgical planning. Eur sintering guide for transferring a virtual plan to real time surgery in
Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2015;272(6):1491–501. composite mandibular reconstruction with free fibula osseous flaps. Int J
275. Yu D, Liu J, Zhu H, Li Z, Huang X, Wei D, Lin Y, He J, Zhao W. Application of Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;38(2):187–92.
three-dimensional printing technique in repair and reconstruction of 295. Liu XJ, Gui L, Mao C, Peng X, Yu GY. Applying computer techniques in
maxillofacial bone defect. Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. maxillofacial reconstruction using a fibula flap: a messenger and an
2014;28(3):292–5. evaluation method. J Craniofac Surg. 2009;20(2):372–7.
276. Shu DL, Liu XZ, Guo B, Ran W, Liao X, Zhang YY. Accuracy of using 296. Modabber A, Gerressen M, Stiller MB, Noroozi N, Füglein A, Hölzle F,
computer-aided rapid prototyping templates for mandible reconstruction Riediger D, Ghassemi A. Computer-assisted mandibular reconstruction with
with an iliac crest graft. World J Surg Oncol. 2014;12:190. vascularized iliac crest bone graft. Aesthet Plast Surg. 2012;36(3):653–9.
297. Ayoub N, Ghassemi A, Rana M, Gerressen M, Riediger D, Hölzle F, Modabber partial nephrectomy in complex tumor cases. Urology. 2016;91:226–33.
A. Evaluation of computer-assisted mandibular reconstruction with https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2015.11.060.
vascularized iliac crest bone graft compared to conventional surgery: a 318. Bernhard J-C, Isotani S, Matsugasumi T, Duddalwar V, Hung AJ, Suer E, Baco
randomized prospective clinical trial. Trials. 2014;15:114. E, Satkunasivam R, Djaladat H, Metcalfe C, Hu B, Wong K, Park D, Nguyen M,
298. Rude K, Thygesen TH, Sørensen JA. Reconstruction of the maxilla using a Hwang D, Bazargani ST, de Castro Abreu AL, Aron M, Ukimura O, Gill IS.
fibula graft and virtual planning techniques. BMJ Case Rep. 2014. https://doi. Personalized 3D printed model of kidney and tumor anatomy: a useful tool
org/10.1136/bcr-2014-203601. for patient education. World J Urol. 2016;34:337–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/
299. Sieira Gil R, Roig AM, Obispo CA, Morla A, Pagès CM, Perez JL. Surgical s00345-015-1632-2.
planning and microvascular reconstruction of the mandible with a fibular 319. Knoedler M, Feibus AH, Lange A, Maddox MM, Ledet E, Thomas R, Silberstein JL.
flap using computer-aided design, rapid prototype modelling, and Individualized physical 3-dimensional kidney tumor models constructed from 3-
precontoured titanium reconstruction plates: a prospective study. Br J Oral dimensional printers result in improved trainee anatomic understanding. Urology.
Maxillofac Surg. 2015;53(1):49–53. 2015;85:1257–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2015.02.053.
300. Suchyta M, Mardini S. Innovations and future directions in head and neck 320. Zhang Y, Ge H, Li N, Yu C, Guo H, Jin S, Liu J, Na Y. Evaluation of three-
microsurgical reconstruction. Clin Plast Surg. 2017;44(2):325–44. dimensional printing for laparoscopic partial nephrectomy of renal tumors:
301. Stoetzer M, Rana M, von See C, Eckardt AM, Gellrich NC. Reconstruction of a preliminary report. World J Urol. 2016;34:533–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/
defects of maxillary sinus wall after removal of a huge odontogenic lesion s00345-015-1530-7.
using prebended 3D titanium-mesh and CAD/CAM technique. Head Face 321. Stone L. Kidney cancer: a model for the masses--3D printing of kidney
Med. 2011;7:21. tumours. Nat Rev Urol. 2014;11:428. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2014.167.
302. Tasopoulos T, Kouveliotis G, Polyzois G, Karathanasi V. Fabrication of a 3D 322. Silberstein JL, Maddox MM, Dorsey P, Feibus A, Thomas R, Lee BR. Physical
printing definitive obturator prosthesis: a clinical report. Acta Stomatol models of renal malignancies using standard cross-sectional imaging and 3-
Croat. 2017;51(1):53–8. dimensional printers: a pilot study. Urology. 2014;84:268–72. https://doi.org/
303. Antonelli JA. Innovations in surgical stone disease. Curr Opin Urol. 2016; 10.1016/j.urology.2014.03.042.
26(3):240–7. 323. Challoner A, Erolin C. Creating pathology models from MRI data: a
304. Atalay HA, Canat HL, Ülker V, Alkan İ, Özkuvanci Ü, Altunrende F. Impact of comparison of virtual 3D modelling and rapid prototyping techniques. J Vis
personalized three-dimensional -3D- printed pelvicalyceal system models on Commun Med. 2013;36:11–9. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453054.2013.790011.
patient information in percutaneous nephrolithotripsy surgery: a pilot study. Int 324. Cernat E, Docquier P-L, Paul L, Banse X, Codorean I-B. Patient specific
Braz J Urol. 2017;43:470–5. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2016.0441. instruments for complex tumor resection-reconstruction surgery within the
305. Atalay HA, Ülker V, Alkan İ, Canat HL, Özkuvancı Ü, Altunrende F. Impact of pelvis: a series of 4 cases. Chirurgia (Bucur). 2016;111:439–44. https://doi.org/
three-dimensional printed Pelvicaliceal system models on residents’ 10.21614/chirurgia.111.5.439.
understanding of Pelvicaliceal system anatomy before percutaneous 325. Srougi V, Rocha BA, Tanno FY, Almeida MQ, Baroni RH, Mendonça BB,
Nephrolithotripsy surgery: a pilot study. J Endourol. 2016;30:1132–7. https:// Srougi M, Fragoso MC, Chambô JL. The use of three-dimensional printers
doi.org/10.1089/end.2016.0307. for partial adrenalectomy: estimating the resection limits. Urology. 2016;90:
306. Bruyère F, Leroux C, Brunereau L, Lermusiaux P. Rapid prototyping model 217–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2015.11.043.
for percutaneous nephrolithotomy training. J Endourol. 2008;22:91–6. 326. Wendler JJ, Klink F, Seifert S, Fischbach F, Jandrig B, Porsch M, Pech M,
https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2007.0025. Baumunk D, Ricke J, Schostak M, Liehr U-B. Irreversible electroporation of
307. Mishra S, Jagtap J, Sabnis RB, Desai MR. Training in percutaneous prostate Cancer: patient-specific pretreatment simulation by electric field
nephrolithotomy. Curr Opin Urol. 2013;23:147–51. https://doi.org/10.1097/ measurement in a 3D bioprinted textured prostate Cancer model to
MOU.0b013e32835d4e37. achieve optimal electroporation parameters for image-guided focal ablation.
308. Powers MK, Lee BR, Silberstein J. Three-dimensional printing of surgical Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2016;39:1668–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/
anatomy. Curr Opin Urol. 2016;26:283–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/MOU. s00270-016-1390-6.
0000000000000274. 327. Shin T, Ukimura O, Gill IS. Three-dimensional printed model of prostate
309. Sweet RM. The CREST simulation development process: training the next anatomy and targeted biopsy-proven index tumor to facilitate nerve-
generation. J Endourol. 2017;31:S69–75. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2016.0613. sparing prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2016;69:377–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
310. Westerman ME, Matsumoto JM, Morris JM, Leibovich BC. Three-dimensional eururo.2015.09.024.
printing for renal Cancer and surgical planning. Eur Urol Focus. 2016;2:574– 328. Kadimisetty K, Mosa IM, Malla S, Satterwhite-Warden JE, Kuhns TM, Faria RC,
6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2016.12.009. Lee NH, Rusling JF. 3D-printed supercapacitor-powered
311. Wake N, Rude T, Kang SK, Stifelman MD, Borin JF, Sodickson DK, Huang WC, electrochemiluminescent protein immunoarray. Biosens Bioelectron. 2016;
Chandarana H. 3D printed renal cancer models derived from MRI data: 77:188–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2015.09.017.
application in pre-surgical planning. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2017;42:1501–9. 329. Fitzgerald KA, Guo J, Tierney EG, Curtin CM, Malhotra M, Darcy R, O’Brien FJ,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-016-1022-2. O’Driscoll CM. The use of collagen-based scaffolds to simulate prostate
312. Golab A, Smektala T, Kaczmarek K, Stamirowski R, Hrab M, Slojewski M. cancer bone metastases with potential for evaluating delivery of
Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy supported by training involving nanoparticulate gene therapeutics. Biomaterials. 2015;66:53–66. https://doi.
personalized silicone replica poured in three-dimensional printed casting org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2015.07.019.
Mold. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2017;27:420–2. https://doi.org/10. 330. Zou W, Fisher T, Zhang M, Kim L, Chen T, Narra V, Swann B, Singh R, Siderit
1089/lap.2016.0596. R, Yin L, Teo B-KK, McKenna M, McDonough J, Ning YJ. Potential of 3D
313. Von Rundstedt F-C, Scovell JM, Agrawal S, Zaneveld J, Link RE. Utility of printing technologies for fabrication of electron bolus and proton
patient-specific silicone renal models for planning and rehearsal of complex compensators. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2015;16:4959.
tumour resections prior to robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. 331. Li P, Jiang S, Yu Y, Yang J, Yang Z. Biomaterial characteristics and
BJU Int. 2017;119:598–604. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13712. application of silicone rubber and PVA hydrogels mimicked in organ groups
314. Smektala T, Goląb A, Królikowski M, Slojewski M. Low cost silicone renal for prostate brachytherapy. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2015;49:220–34.
replicas for surgical training - technical note. Arch Esp Urol. 2016;69:434–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2015.05.012.
315. Golab A, Slojewski M, Brykczynski M, Lukowiak M, Boehlke M, Matias D, 332. Priester A, Natarajan S, Le JD, Garritano J, Radosavcev B, Grundfest W,
Smektala T. Three-dimensional printing as an interdisciplinary Margolis DJ, Marks LS, Huang J. A system for evaluating magnetic
communication tool: preparing for removal of a Giant renal tumor and resonance imaging of prostate cancer using patient-specific 3D printed
atrium neoplastic mass. Heart Surg Forum. 2016;19:E185–6. molds. Am J Clin Exp Urol. 2014;2:127–35.
316. Jung JP, Bhuiyan DB, Ogle BM. Solid organ fabrication: comparison of 333. Harrison KM, Ebert MA, Kron T, Howlett SJ, Cornes D, Hamilton CS, Denham
decellularization to 3D bioprinting. Biomater Res. 2016;20:27. https://doi.org/ JW. Design, manufacture, and evaluation of an anthropomorphic pelvic
10.1186/s40824-016-0074-2. phantom purpose-built for radiotherapy dosimetric intercomparison. Med
317. Komai Y, Sugimoto M, Gotohda N, Matsubara N, Kobayashi T, Sakai Y, Shiga Phys. 2011;38:5330–7. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3626573.
Y, Saito N. Patient-specific 3-dimensional printed kidney designed for “4D” 334. Henry OY, Fragoso A, Beni V, Laboria N, Sánchez JLA, Latta D, Von Germar F,
surgical navigation: a novel aid to facilitate minimally invasive off-clamp Drese K, Katakis I, O’Sullivan CK. Design and testing of a packaged microfluidic
cell for the multiplexed electrochemical detection of cancer markers. 354. Chung KJ, Huang B, Choi CH, Park YW, Kim HN. Utility of 3D printing for
Electrophoresis. 2009;30:3398–405. https://doi.org/10.1002/elps.200900368. complex distal Tibial fractures and malleolar avulsion fractures: technical tip.
335. Sayed Aluwee SAZB, Zhou X, Kato H, Makino H, Muramatsu C, Hara T, Foot Ankle Int. 2015;36:1504–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/1071100715595695.
Matsuo M, Fujita H. Evaluation of pre-surgical models for uterine surgery by 355. Chung KJ, Hong DY, Kim YT, Yang I, Park YW, Kim HN. Preshaping plates for
use of three-dimensional printing and mold casting. Radiol Phys Technol. minimally invasive fixation of calcaneal fractures using a real-size 3D-printed
2017;10:279–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-017-0397-2. model as a preoperative and intraoperative tool. Foot Ankle Int. 2014;35:
336. Ji Z, Jiang YL, Guo FX, Peng R, Sun HT, Fan JH, Wang JJ. Dosimetry 1231–6. https://doi.org/10.1177/1071100714544522.
verification of radioactive seed implantation with 3D printing template and 356. De Muinck Keizer RJO, Lechner KM, Mulders M a M, Schep NWL, Eygendaal D,
CT guidance for paravertebral/retroperitoneal malignant tumor. Zhonghua Goslings JC. Three-dimensional virtual planning of corrective osteotomies of
Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2017;97:996–1000. distal radius malunions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Strategies Trauma
337. Kadoya N, Miyasaka Y, Nakajima Y, Kuroda Y, Ito K, Chiba M, Sato K, Dobashi Limb Reconstr. 2017;12:77–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11751-017-0284-8.
S, Yamamoto T, Takahashi N, Kubozono M, Takeda K, Jingu K. Evaluation of 357. Deshmukh TR, Kuthe AM, Vaibhav B. Preplanning and simulation of surgery
deformable image registration between external beam radiotherapy and using rapid modelling. J Med Eng Technol. 2010;34:291–4. https://doi.org/
HDR brachytherapy for cervical cancer with a 3D-printed deformable pelvis 10.3109/03091901003753058.
phantom. Med Phys. 2017;44:1445–55. https://doi.org/10.1002/mp.12168. 358. Du H, Tian X, Li T, Yang J, Li K, Pei G, Xie L. Use of patient-specific templates
338. Baek M-H, Kim D-Y, Kim N, Rhim CC, Kim J-H, Nam J-H. Incorporating a 3- in hip resurfacing arthroplasty: experience from sixteen cases. Int Orthop.
dimensional printer into the management of early-stage cervical cancer. J 2013;37:777–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-013-1842-4.
Surg Oncol. 2016;114:150–2. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.24292. 359. Duncan JM, Nahas S, Akhtar K, Daurka J. The use of a 3D printer in
339. Lindegaard JC, Madsen ML, Traberg A, Meisner B, Nielsen SK, Tanderup K, pre-operative planning for a patient requiring acetabular reconstructive
Spejlborg H, Fokdal LU, Nørrevang O. Individualised 3D printed vaginal surgery. J Orthop Case Rep. 2015;5:23–5. https://doi.org/10.13107/jocr.
template for MRI guided brachytherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer. 2250-0685.247.
Radiother Oncol. 2016;118:173–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2015.12.012. 360. Frame M, Huntley JS. Rapid prototyping in orthopaedic surgery: a user’s
340. Bartellas M, Ryan S, Doucet G, Murphy D, Turner J. Three-dimensional printing guide. ScientificWorldJournal. 2012;2012:838575. https://doi.org/10.1100/
of a hemorrhagic cervical Cancer model for postgraduate gynecological 2012/838575.
training. Cureus. 2017;9:e950. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.950. 361. Fuller SM, Butz DR, Vevang CB, Makhlouf MV. Application of 3-dimensional
341. Zhao Y, Yao R, Ouyang L, Ding H, Zhang T, Zhang K, Cheng S, Sun W. printing in hand surgery for production of a novel bone reduction clamp. J
Three-dimensional printing of Hela cells for cervical tumor model in vitro. Hand Surg Am. 2014;39:1840–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2014.06.009.
Biofabrication. 2014;6:035001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5082/6/3/035001. 362. Giannetti S, Bizzotto N, Stancati A, Santucci A. Minimally invasive fixation in
342. Ajao MO, Clark NV, Kelil T, Cohen SL, Einarsson JI. Case report: three- tibial plateau fractures using an pre-operative and intra-operative real size 3D
dimensional printed model for deep infiltrating endometriosis. J Minim printing. Injury. 2017;48:784–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2016.11.015.
Invasive Gynecol. 2017;24:1239–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2017.06.006. 363. Gittard SD, Narayan RJ, Lusk J, Morel P, Stockmans F, Ramsey M, Laverde C,
343. Sethi R, Cunha A, Mellis K, Siauw T, Diederich C, Pouliot J, Hsu I-C. Clinical Phillips J, Monteiro-Riviere NA, Ovsianikov A, Chichkov BN. Rapid
applications of custom-made vaginal cylinders constructed using three- prototyping of scaphoid and lunate bones. Biotechnol J. 2009;4:129–34.
dimensional printing technology. J Contemp Brachytherapy. 2016;8:208–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/biot.200800233.
https://doi.org/10.5114/jcb.2016.60679. 364. Haefeli M, Schaefer DJ, Schumacher R, Müller-Gerbl M, Honigmann P.
344. Park C-J, Kim H-W, Jeong S, Seo S, Park Y, Moon HS, Lee J-H. Anti-reflux Titanium template for scaphoid reconstruction. J Hand Surg Eur Vol. 2015;
ureteral stent with polymeric flap valve using three-dimensional printing: an 40:526–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/1753193414549008.
in vitro study. J Endourol. 2015;29:933–8. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2015. 365. Hamada Y, Gotani H, Sasaki K, Tanaka Y, Egawa H, Kanchanathepsak T.
0154. Corrective osteotomy of Malunited Diaphyseal fractures of the forearm
345. Bagaria V, Deshpande S, Rasalkar DD, Kuthe A, Paunipagar BK. Use of rapid simplified using 3-dimensional CT data: proposal of our simple strategy
prototyping and three-dimensional reconstruction modeling in the through case presentation. Hand (N Y). 2017;12:NP95–8. https://doi.org/10.
management of complex fractures. Eur J Radiol. 2011;80:814–20. https://doi. 1177/1558944717692087.
org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.10.007. 366. Hamid KS, Parekh SG, Adams SB. Salvage of severe foot and ankle trauma
346. Bizzotto N, Tami I, Tami A, Spiegel A, Romani D, Corain M, Adani R, Magnan with a 3D printed scaffold. Foot Ankle Int. 2016;37:433–9. https://doi.org/10.
B. 3D printed models of distal radius fractures. Injury. 2016;47:976–8. https:// 1177/1071100715620895.
doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2016.01.013. 367. Honigmann P, Thieringer F, Steiger R, Haefeli M, Schumacher R, Henning J.
347. Bizzotto N, Sandri A, Regis D, Romani D, Tami I, Magnan B. Three- A simple 3-dimensional printed aid for a corrective palmar opening wedge
dimensional printing of bone fractures: a new tangible realistic way for osteotomy of the distal radius. J Hand Surg Am. 2016;41:464–9. https://doi.
preoperative planning and education. Surg Innov. 2015;22:548–51. https:// org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2015.12.022.
doi.org/10.1177/1553350614547773. 368. Hsieh M-K, Chen AC-Y, Cheng C-Y, Chou Y-C, Chan Y-S, Hsu K-Y.
348. Brown GA, Firoozbakhsh K, DeCoster TA, Reyna JR, Moneim M. Rapid Repositioning osteotomy for intra-articular malunion of distal radius with
prototyping: the future of trauma surgery? J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85-A radiocarpal and/or distal radioulnar joint subluxation. J Trauma. 2010;69:
Suppl 4:49–55. 418–22. https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0b013e3181ca0834.
349. Chana-Rodríguez F, Mañanes RP, Rojo-Manaute J, Gil P, Martínez-Gómiz JM, 369. Hsu AR, Ellington JK. Patient-specific 3-dimensional printed titanium truss
Vaquero-Martín J. 3D surgical printing and pre contoured plates for acetabular cage with Tibiotalocalcaneal arthrodesis for salvage of persistent distal tibia
fractures. Injury. 2016;47:2507–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2016.08.027. nonunion. Foot Ankle Spec. 2015;8:483–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/
350. Chen C, Cai L, Zhang C, Wang J, Guo X, Zhou Y. Treatment of die-punch 1938640015593079.
fractures with 3D printing technology. J Investig Surg. 2017;19:1–8. https:// 370. Huang H, Hsieh M-F, Zhang G, Ouyang H, Zeng C, Yan B, Xu J, Yang Y, Wu
doi.org/10.1080/08941939.2017.1339150. Z, Huang W. Improved accuracy of 3D-printed navigational template during
351. Chen H, Wang G, Li R, Sun Y, Wang F, Zhao H, Zhang P, Zhang X. A novel complicated tibial plateau fracture surgery. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med.
navigation template for fixation of acetabular posterior column fractures 2015;38:109–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13246-015-0330-0.
with antegrade lag screws: design and application. Int Orthop. 2016;40:827– 371. Huang H, Zhang G, Ouyang H, Yang Y, Wu Z, Xu J, Xie P, Huang W. Internal
34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-2813-8. fixation surgery planning for complex tibial plateau fracture based on digital
352. Chen X, Chen X, Zhang G, Lin H, Yu Z, Wu C, Li X, Lin Y, Huang W. Accurate design and 3D printing. Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao. 2015;35:218–22.
fixation of plates and screws for the treatment of acetabular fractures using 372. Huang M, Ding H, Huang M, Wang H, Teng Q. PRELIMINARY APPLICATION
3D-printed guiding templates: an experimental study. Injury. 2017;48:1147– OF THREE-DIMENSIONAL PRINTING PERSONALIZED EXTERNAL FIXATOR IN
54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2017.03.009. SERIOUS TIBIOFIBULA FRACTURES. Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za
353. Choy WJ, Mobbs RJ, Wilcox B, Phan S, Phan K, Sutterlin CE. Reconstruction Zhi. 2016;30:156–60.
of thoracic spine using a personalized 3D-printed vertebral body in 373. Huang S-L, Wen B, Bian W-G, Yan H-W. Reconstruction of comminuted
adolescent with T9 primary bone tumor. World Neurosurg. 2017;105:1032. long-bone fracture using CF/CPC scaffolds manufactured by rapid
e13–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2017.05.133. prototyping. Med Sci Monit. 2012;18:BR435–40.
374. Hurson C, Tansey A, O’Donnchadha B, Nicholson P, Rice J, McElwain J. Rapid 393. Sanghavi PS, Jankharia BG. Holding versus seeing pathology. Three-
prototyping in the assessment, classification and preoperative planning of dimensional printing of the bony pelvis for preoperative planning of a
acetabular fractures. Injury. 2007;38:1158–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury. complex pelvis fracture: a case report. Indian J Radiol Imaging. 2016;26:397–
2007.05.020. 401. https://doi.org/10.4103/0971-3026.190414.
375. Jeong H-S, Park K-J, Kil K-M, Chong S, Eun H-J, Lee T-S, Lee J-P. Minimally 394. Schweizer A, Fürnstahl P, Nagy L. Three-dimensional correction of distal
invasive plate osteosynthesis using 3D printing for shaft fractures of radius intra-articular malunions using patient-specific drill guides. J Hand
clavicles: technical note. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2014;134:1551–5. https:// Surg Am. 2013;38:2339–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2013.09.023.
doi.org/10.1007/s00402-014-2075-8. 395. Shuang F, Hu W, Shao Y, Li H, Zou H. Treatment of intercondylar humeral
376. Kacl GM, Zanetti M, Amgwerd M, Trentz O, Seifert B, Stucki H, Hodler J. fractures with 3D-printed Osteosynthesis plates. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;
Rapid prototyping (stereolithography) in the management of intra-articular 95:e2461. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000002461.
calcaneal fractures. Eur Radiol. 1997;7:187–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/ 396. Storelli DAR, Bauer AS, Lattanza LL, McCarroll HR. The use of computer-
s003300050132. aided design and 3-dimensional models in the treatment of forearm
377. Kataoka T, Oka K, Miyake J, Omori S, Tanaka H, Murase T. 3-dimensional malunions in children. Tech Hand Up Extrem Surg. 2015;19:23–6. https://doi.
prebent plate fixation in corrective osteotomy of malunited upper extremity org/10.1097/BTH.0000000000000070.
fractures using a real-sized plastic bone model prepared by preoperative 397. Tricot M, Duy KT, Docquier P-L. 3D-corrective osteotomy using surgical guides for
computer simulation. J Hand Surg Am. 2013;38:909–19. https://doi.org/10. posttraumatic distal humeral deformity. Acta Orthop Belg. 2012;78:538–42.
1016/j.jhsa.2013.02.024. 398. Upex P, Jouffroy P, Riouallon G. Application of 3D printing for treating
378. Kim HN, Liu XN, Noh KC. Use of a real-size 3D-printed model as a fractures of both columns of the acetabulum: benefit of pre-contouring
preoperative and intraoperative tool for minimally invasive plating of plates on the mirrored healthy pelvis. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2017;103:
comminuted midshaft clavicle fractures. J Orthop Surg Res. 2015;10:91. 331–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2016.11.021.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-015-0233-5. 399. Wu X-B, Wang J-Q, Zhao C-P, Sun X, Shi Y, Zhang Z-A, Li Y-N, Wang M-Y.
379. Kunz M, Ma B, Rudan JF, Ellis RE, Pichora DR. Image-guided distal radius Printed three-dimensional anatomic templates for virtual preoperative
osteotomy using patient-specific instrument guides. J Hand Surg Am. 2013; planning before reconstruction of old pelvic injuries: initial results. Chin Med
38:1618–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2013.05.018. J. 2015;128:477–82. https://doi.org/10.4103/0366-6999.151088.
380. Lazarus P, Pire E, Sapa C, Ruffenach L, Saur M, Liverneaux P, Hidalgo Diaz JJ. 400. Yang L, Shang X-W, Fan J-N, He Z-X, Wang J-J, Liu M, Zhuang Y, Ye C.
Design and evaluation of a new synthetic wrist procedural simulator Application of 3D printing in the surgical planning of Trimalleolar fracture
(Wristsim®) for training of distal radius fracture fixation by volar plating. and doctor-patient communication. Biomed Res Int. 2016;2016:2482086.
Hand Surg Rehabil. 2017;36:275–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hansur.2017.03. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/2482086.
002. 401. Yang P, Du D, Zhou Z, Lu N, Fu Q, Ma J, Zhao L, Chen A. 3D printing-
381. Li B, Chen B, Zhang Y, Wang X, Wang F, Xia H, Yin Q. Comparative use of assisted osteotomy treatment for the malunion of lateral tibial plateau
the computer-aided angiography and rapid prototyping technology versus fracture. Injury. 2016;47:2816–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2016.09.025.
conventional imaging in the management of the tile C pelvic fractures. Int 402. Yin H-W, Xu J, Xu W-D. 3-dimensional printing-assisted percutaneous
Orthop. 2016;40:161–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-2800-0. fixation for acute scaphoid fracture: 1-shot procedure. J Hand Surg Am.
382. Li Z, Li Z, Xu R, Li M, Li J, Liu Y, Sui D, Zhang W, Chen Z. Three-dimensional 2017;42:301.e1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2017.01.017.
printing models improve understanding of spinal fracture--a randomized 403. You W, Liu LJ, Chen HX, Xiong JY, Wang DM, Huang JH, Ding JL, Wang DP.
controlled study in China. Sci Rep. 2015;5:11570. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep11570. Application of 3D printing technology on the treatment of complex proximal
383. Liu X, Zeng C-J, Lu J-S, Lin X-C, Huang H-J, Tan X-Y, Cai D-Z. Application of 3D humeral fractures (Neer3-part and 4-part) in old people. Orthop Traumatol
printing and computer-assisted surgical simulation in preoperative planning Surg Res. 2016;102:897–903. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2016.06.009.
for acetabular fracture. Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao. 2017;37:378–82. 404. Zeng C, Xing W, Wu Z, Huang H, Huang W. A combination of three-
384. Liu Z-J, Jia J, Zhang Y-G, Tian W, Jin X, Hu Y-C. Internal fixation of complicated dimensional printing and computer-assisted virtual surgical procedure for
acetabular fractures directed by preoperative surgery with 3D printing models. preoperative planning of acetabular fracture reduction. Injury. 2016;47:2223–
Orthop Surg. 2017;9:257–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/os.12324. 7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2016.03.015.
385. Lou Y, Cai L, Wang C, Tang Q, Pan T, Guo X, Wang J. Comparison of 405. Zeng C, Xiao J, Wu Z, Huang W. Evaluation of three-dimensional printing for
traditional surgery and surgery assisted by three dimensional printing internal fixation of unstable pelvic fracture from minimal invasive Para-rectus
technology in the treatment of tibial plateau fractures. Int Orthop. 2017;41: abdominis approach: a preliminary report. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015;8:13039–44.
1875–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-017-3445-y. 406. Zhang Y, Lu S, Xu Y, Shi J, Li Y, Feng Z. Application of navigation template
386. Maini L, Sharma A, Jha S, Sharma A, Tiwari A. Three-dimensional printing to fixation of sacral fracture using three-dimensional reconstruction and
and patient-specific pre-contoured plate: future of acetabulum fracture reverse engineering technique. Chin J Traumatol. 2009;12:214–7.
fixation? Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2018;44:215–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/ 407. Park CH, Rios HF, Taut AD, Padial-Molina M, Flanagan CL, Pilipchuk SP,
s00068-016-0738-6. Hollister SJ, Giannobile WV. Image-based, fiber guiding scaffolds: a platform
387. Manganaro MS, Morag Y, Weadock WJ, Yablon CM, Gaetke-Udager K, Stein for regenerating tissue interfaces. Tissue Eng Part C Methods. 2014;20:533–
EB. Creating three-dimensional printed models of acetabular fractures for 42. https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.TEC.2013.0619.
use as educational tools. Radiographics. 2017;37:871–80. https://doi.org/10. 408. Sha Y, Wang H, Ding J, Tang H, Li C, Luo H, Liu J, Xu Y. A novel patient-specific
1148/rg.2017160129. navigational template for anatomical reconstruction of the lateral ankle
388. Omar M, Zeller A-N, Gellrich N-C, Rana M, Krettek C, Liodakis E. Application ligaments. Int Orthop. 2016;40:59–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-2817-4.
of a customized 3D printed reduction aid after external fixation of the 409. Bicanic G, Barbaric K, Bohacek I, Aljinovic A, Delimar D. Current concept in dysplastic
femur and tibia: technical note. Int J Med Robot. 2017;13(4). https://doi.org/ hip arthroplasty: techniques for acetabular and femoral reconstruction. World J
10.1002/rcs.1803. Orthop. 2014;5:412–24. https://doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v5.i4.412.
389. Otsuki B, Takemoto M, Kawanabe K, Awa Y, Akiyama H, Fujibayashi S, 410. Pressel T, Max S, Pfeifer R, Ostermeier S, Windhagen H, Hurschler C. A rapid
Nakamura T, Matsuda S. Developing a novel custom cutting guide for prototyping model for biomechanical evaluation of pelvic osteotomies.
curved peri-acetabular osteotomy. Int Orthop. 2013;37:1033–8. https://doi. Biomed Tech (Berl). 2008;53:65–9.
org/10.1007/s00264-013-1873-x. 411. Tong K, Zhang Y, Zhang S, Yu B. Application of computer-aided osteotomy
390. Oxley B, Behr S. Stabilisation of a cranial cervical vertebral fracture using a template design in treatment of developmental dysplasia of the hip with
3D-printed patient-specific drill guide. J Small Anim Pract. 2016;57:277. steel osteotomy. Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao. 2013;33:906–9.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jsap.12469. 412. Xu J, Li D, Ma R, Barden B, Ding Y. Application of rapid prototyping pelvic
391. Qiao F, Li D, Jin Z, Gao Y, Zhou T, He J, Cheng L. Application of 3D printed model for patients with DDH to facilitate arthroplasty planning: a pilot study. J
customized external fixator in fracture reduction. Injury. 2015;46:1150–5. Arthroplast. 2015;30:1963–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2015.05.033.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2015.01.020. 413. Zhang YZ, Chen B, Lu S, Yang Y, Zhao JM, Liu R, Li YB, Pei GX. Preliminary
392. Rankin TM, Giovinco NA, Cucher DJ, Watts G, Hurwitz B, Armstrong DG. application of computer-assisted patient-specific acetabular navigational
Three-dimensional printing surgical instruments: are we there yet? J Surg template for total hip arthroplasty in adult single development dysplasia of
Res. 2014;189:193–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2014.02.020. the hip. Int J Med Robot. 2011;7:469–74. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.423.
414. Zheng P, Yao Q, Xu P, Wang L. Application of computer-aided design and 434. Peters P, Langlotz F, Nolte L-P. Computer assisted screw insertion into
3D-printed navigation template in locking compression pediatric hip real 3D rapid prototyping pelvis models. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon).
PlateΤΜ placement for pediatric hip disease. Int J Comput Assist Radiol 2002;17:376–82.
Surg. 2017;12:865–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-017-1535-3. 435. Ren X, Yang L, Duan X-J. Three-dimensional printing in the surgical
415. Aranda JL, Jiménez MF, Rodríguez M, Varela G. Tridimensional titanium- treatment of osteoid osteoma of the calcaneus: a case report. J Int Med Res.
printed custom-made prosthesis for sternocostal reconstruction. Eur J 2017;45:372–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/0300060516686514.
Cardiothorac Surg. 2015;48:e92–4. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejcts/ezv265. 436. Tam MD, Laycock SD, Bell D, Chojnowski A. 3-D printout of a DICOM file to
416. Docquier PL, Paul L, Cartiaux O, Delloye C, Banse X. Computer-assisted resection aid surgical planning in a 6 year old patient with a large scapular
and reconstruction of pelvic tumor sarcoma. Sarcoma. 2010;2010:125162. osteochondroma complicating congenital diaphyseal aclasia. J Radiol Case
417. Bastian L, Hüfner T, Mössinger E, Geerling J, Goesling T, Busche M, Kendoff D, Rep. 2012;6:31–7. https://doi.org/10.3941/jrcr.v6i1.889.
Bading S, Rosenthal H, Krettek C. Integration of modern technologies in therapy of 437. Wang X, Shi J, Zhang S, Zhang Z, Li X, Li Z. Pediatric lumbar pedicle screw
sarcomas of the pelvis. Computer-assisted hemipelvectomy and implantation of a placement using navigation templates: a cadaveric study. Indian J Orthop.
“custom-made” Bonit gentamycin coated partial pelvic prosthesis. Unfallchirurg. 2017;51:468–73. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5413.209955.
2003;106:956–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00113-003-0680-z. 438. Wang Y-T, Yang X-J, Yan B, Zeng T-H, Qiu Y-Y, Chen S-J. Clinical application
418. Bellanova L, Paul L, Docquier P-L. Surgical guides (patient-specific instruments) for of three-dimensional printing in the personalized treatment of complex
pediatric tibial bone sarcoma resection and allograft reconstruction. Sarcoma. spinal disorders. Chin J Traumatol. 2016;19:31–4.
2013;2013:787653. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/787653. 439. Wei R, Guo W, Ji T, Zhang Y, Liang H. One-step reconstruction with a 3D-
419. Cartiaux O, Paul L, Francq BG, Banse X, Docquier P-L. Improved accuracy printed, custom-made prosthesis after total en bloc sacrectomy: a technical
with 3D planning and patient-specific instruments during simulated pelvic note. Eur Spine J. 2017;26:1902–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-016-4871-
bone tumor surgery. Ann Biomed Eng. 2014;42:205–13. https://doi.org/10. z.
1007/s10439-013-0890-7. 440. Wong KC, Kumta SM, Geel NV, Demol J. One-step reconstruction with a 3D-
420. Chen X, Xu L, Wang W, Li X, Sun Y, Politis C. Computer-aided design and printed, biomechanically evaluated custom implant after complex pelvic
manufacturing of surgical templates and their clinical applications: a review. Expert tumor resection. Comput Aided Surg. 2015;20:14–23. https://doi.org/10.
Rev Med Devices. 2016;13:853–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/17434440.2016.1218758. 3109/10929088.2015.1076039.
421. Dai K-R, Yan M-N, Zhu Z-A, Sun Y-H. Computer-aided custom-made 441. Xiao J-R, Huang W-D, Yang X-H, Yan W-J, Song D-W, Wei H-F, Liu T-L, Wu Z-
hemipelvic prosthesis used in extensive pelvic lesions. J Arthroplast. 2007;22: P, Yang C. En bloc resection of primary malignant bone tumor in the
981–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2007.05.002. cervical spine based on 3-dimensional printing technology. Orthop Surg.
422. Guenette JP, Himes N, Giannopoulos AA, Kelil T, Mitsouras D, Lee TC. Computer- 2016;8:171–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/os.12234.
based vertebral tumor Cryoablation planning and procedure simulation involving 442. Xu N, Wei F, Liu X, Jiang L, Cai H, Li Z, Yu M, Wu F, Liu Z. Reconstruction of
two cases using MRI-visible 3D printing and advanced visualization. AJR Am J the upper cervical spine using a personalized 3D-printed vertebral body in
Roentgenol. 2016;207:1128–31. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.16.16059. an adolescent with Ewing sarcoma. Spine. 2016;41:E50–4. https://doi.org/10.
423. Helguero CG, Kao I, Komatsu DE, Shaikh S, Hansen D, Franco J, Khan F. 1097/BRS.0000000000001179.
Improving the accuracy of wide resection of bone tumors and enhancing 443. Zhang Y, Wen L, Zhang J, Yan G, Zhou Y, Huang B. Three-dimensional
implant fit: a cadaveric study. J Orthop. 2015;12:S188–94. https://doi.org/10. printing and computer navigation assisted hemipelvectomy for en bloc
1016/j.jor.2015.10.010. resection of osteochondroma: a case report. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017;96:
424. Herath HMTU, Di Silvio L, Evans JRG. Biological evaluation of solid e6414. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000006414.
freeformed, hard tissue scaffolds for orthopedic applications. J Appl 444. Anderl W, Pauzenberger L, Schwameis E. The MyKnee® patient-specific
Biomater Biomech. 2010;8:89–96. system. Rationale, technique and results. Orthopade. 2016;45:294–301.
425. Iqbal T, Shi L, Wang L, Liu Y, Li D, Qin M, Jin Z. Development of finite https://doi.org/10.1007/s00132-016-3241-1.
element model for customized prostheses design for patient with pelvic 445. Beckmann J, Steinert A, Zilkens C, Zeh A, Schnurr C, Schmitt-Sody M,
bone tumor. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2017;231:525–33. https://doi.org/10. Gebauer M. Partial replacement of the knee joint with patient-specific
1177/0954411917692009. instruments and implants (ConforMIS iUni, iDuo). Orthopade. 2016;45:322–
426. Kim D, Lim JY, Shim KW, Han JW, Yi S, Yoon DH, Kim KN, Ha Y, Ji GY, Shin 30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00132-016-3237-x.
DA. Sacral reconstruction with a 3D-printed implant after Hemisacrectomy 446. Gauci MO, Boileau P, Baba M, Chaoui J, Walch G. Patient-specific glenoid
in a patient with sacral osteosarcoma: 1-year follow-up result. Yonsei Med J. guides provide accuracy and reproducibility in total shoulder arthroplasty.
2017;58:453–7. https://doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2017.58.2.453. Bone Joint J. 2016;98-B:1080–5. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.98B8.37257.
427. Liang H, Ji T, Zhang Y, Wang Y, Guo W. Reconstruction with 3D-printed 447. Hafez MA, Chelule KL, Seedhom BB, Sherman KP. Computer-assisted total
pelvic endoprostheses after resection of a pelvic tumour. Bone Joint J. 2017; knee arthroplasty using patient-specific templating. Clin Orthop Relat Res.
99-B:267–75. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.99B2.BJJ-2016-0654.R1. 2006;444:184–92. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.blo.0000201148.06454.ef.
428. Lin C-L, Fang J-J, Lin R-M. Resection of giant invasive sacral schwannoma 448. Jaffry Z, Masjedi M, Clarke S, Harris S, Karia M, Andrews B, Cobb J.
using image-based customized osteotomy tools. Eur Spine J. 2016;25:4103– Unicompartmental knee arthroplasties: robot vs. patient specific instrumentation.
7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-016-4782-z. Knee. 2014;21:428–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2013.11.017.
429. Luo W, Huang L, Liu H, Qu W, Zhao X, Wang C, Li C, Yu T, Han Q, Wang J, 449. Kleyer A, Beyer L, Simon C, Stemmler F, Englbrecht M, Beyer C, Rech J,
Qin Y. Customized knee prosthesis in treatment of Giant cell tumors of the Manger B, Krönke G, Schett G, Hueber AJ. Development of three-
proximal tibia: application of 3-dimensional printing Technology in Surgical dimensional prints of arthritic joints for supporting patients’ awareness to
Design. Med Sci Monit. 2017;23:1691–700. structural damage. Arthritis Res Ther. 2017;19:34. https://doi.org/10.1186/
430. Ma L, Zhou Y, Zhu Y, Lin Z, Chen L, Zhang Y, Xia H, Mao C. 3D printed s13075-017-1234-z.
personalized titanium plates improve clinical outcome in microwave 450. Köster G, Biró C. Total and unicompartmental knee replacement. Patient-
ablation of bone tumors around the knee. Sci Rep. 2017;7:7626. https://doi. specific instrumentation. Orthopade. 2016;45:302–13. https://doi.org/10.
org/10.1038/s41598-017-07243-3. 1007/s00132-016-3245-x.
431. Ma L, Zhou Y, Zhu Y, Lin Z, Wang Y, Zhang Y, Xia H, Mao C. 3D-printed 451. Steinert AF, Holzapfel BM, Sefrin L, Arnholdt J, Hoberg M, Rudert M. Total
guiding templates for improved osteosarcoma resection. Sci Rep. 2016;6: knee arthroplasty. Patient-specific instruments and implants. Orthopade.
23335. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep23335. 2016;45:331–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00132-016-3246-9.
432. Mobbs RJ, Coughlan M, Thompson R, Sutterlin CE, Phan K. The utility of 3D 452. Taller S, Srám J, Lukáš R, Endrych L, Džupa V. Fixation of acetabular fractures.
printing for surgical planning and patient-specific implant design for A novel method of pre-operative omega plate contouring. Acta Chir Orthop
complex spinal pathologies: case report. J Neurosurg Spine. 2017;26:513–8. Traumatol Cechoslov. 2014;81:212–20.
https://doi.org/10.3171/2016.9.SPINE16371. 453. Tian SC, Yao QQ, Yin XD, Liu S, Zhou J, Hu J, Li JY, Shan R, Jiang HB, Wang
433. Paiva WS, Amorim R, Bezerra DAF, Masini M. Aplication of the LM. Effects of iASSIST navigation system and personal specific instrument
stereolithography technique in complex spine surgery. Arq Neuropsiquiatr. assisted total knee arthroplasty in the treatment of osteoarthritis. Zhonghua
2007;65:443–5. Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2017;55:423–9.
454. Guarino J, Tennyson S, McCain G, Bond L, Shea K, King H. Rapid prototyping 474. Itagaki MW. Using 3D printed models for planning and guidance during
technology for surgeries of the pediatric spine and pelvis: benefits analysis. J Pediatr endovascular intervention: a technical advance. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2015;21:
Orthop. 2007;27:955–60. https://doi.org/10.1097/bpo.0b013e3181594ced. 338–41. https://doi.org/10.5152/dir.2015.14469.
455. Liu K, Zhang Q, Li X, Zhao C, Quan X, Zhao R, Chen Z, Li Y. Preliminary application 475. Jelenc M, Jelenc B, Knezevic I, Klokocovnik T. New graft sizing rings for
of a multi-level 3D printing drill guide template for pedicle screw placement in aortic valve reimplantation procedures. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg.
severe and rigid scoliosis. Eur Spine J. 2017;26:1684–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/ 2018;26:1–3. https://doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivx257.
s00586-016-4926-1. 476. Kalejs M, von Segesser LK. Rapid prototyping of compliant human aortic
456. Lu S, Zhang YZ, Wang Z, Shi JH, Chen YB, Xu XM, Xu YQ. Accuracy and efficacy roots for assessment of valved stents. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2009;
of thoracic pedicle screws in scoliosis with patient-specific drill template. Med 8:182–6. https://doi.org/10.1510/icvts.2008.194134.
Biol Eng Comput. 2012;50:751–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-012-0900-1. 477. Knox K, Kerber CW, Singel SA, Bailey MJ, Imbesi SG. Rapid prototyping to
457. Mao K, Wang Y, Xiao S, Liu Z, Zhang Y, Zhang X, Wang Z, Lu N, Shourong Z, create vascular replicas from CT scan data: making tools to teach, rehearse,
Xifeng Z, Geng C, Baowei L. Clinical application of computer-designed and choose treatment strategies. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2005;65:47–53.
polystyrene models in complex severe spinal deformities: a pilot study. Eur https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.20333.
Spine J. 2010;19:797–802. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-010-1359-0. 478. Koleilat I, Jaeggli M, Ewing JA, Androes M, Simionescu DT, Eidt J.
458. Salako F, Aubin C-E, Fortin C, Labelle H. Feasibility study of patient-specific Interobserver variability in physician-modified endograft planning by
surgical templates for the fixation of pedicle screws. Stud Health Technol comparison with a three-dimensional printed aortic model. J Vasc Surg.
Inform. 2002;88:419–22. 2016;64:1789–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2015.09.044.
459. Takemoto M, Fujibayashi S, Ota E, Otsuki B, Kimura H, Sakamoto T, Kawai T, 479. Leotta DF, Starnes BW. Custom fenestration templates for endovascular
Futami T, Sasaki K, Matsushita T, Nakamura T, Neo M, Matsuda S. Additive- repair of juxtarenal aortic aneurysms. J Vasc Surg. 2015;61:1637–41. https://
manufactured patient-specific titanium templates for thoracic pedicle screw doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2015.02.016.
placement: novel design with reduced contact area. Eur Spine J. 2016;25: 480. Lermusiaux P, Leroux C, Tasse JC, Castellani L, Martinez R. Aortic aneurysm:
1698–705. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-015-3908-z. construction of a life-size model by rapid prototyping. Ann Vasc Surg. 2001;
460. Wu Z-X, Huang L-Y, Sang H-X, Ma Z-S, Wan S-Y, Cui G, Lei W. Accuracy and 15:131–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s100160010054.
safety assessment of pedicle screw placement using the rapid prototyping 481. Li F, Shan Y, Zhang Y, Niu G. Occlusion of an ascending aortic pseudoaneurysm
technique in severe congenital scoliosis. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2011;24:444– with intraoperative echocardiography and a printed model. J Thorac Cardiovasc
50. https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0b013e318201be2a. Surg. 2016;152:282–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2016.02.031.
461. Yang JC, Ma XY, Lin J, Wu ZH, Zhang K, Yin QS. Personalised modified 482. Meess KM, Izzo RL, Dryjski ML, Curl RE, Harris LM, Springer M, Siddiqui AH,
osteotomy using computer-aided design-rapid prototyping to correct Rudin S, Ionita CN. 3D printed abdominal aortic aneurysm phantom for
thoracic deformities. Int Orthop. 2011;35:1827–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/ image guided surgical planning with a patient specific fenestrated
s00264-010-1155-9. endovascular graft system. Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng. 2017. https://doi.org/
462. Yang M, Li C, Li Y, Zhao Y, Wei X, Zhang G, Fan J, Ni H, Chen Z, Bai Y, Li M. 10.1117/12.2253902.
Application of 3D rapid prototyping technology in posterior corrective 483. Pepper J, Petrou M, Rega F, Rosendahl U, Golesworthy T, Treasure T.
surgery for Lenke 1 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients. Medicine Implantation of an individually computer-designed and manufactured
(Baltimore). 2015;94:e582. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000000582. external support for the Marfan aortic root. Multimed Man Cardiothorac
463. Zhang Y, Shi Y, Wang H, Hou S. Case-control study on accuracy and safety Surg. 2013;2013:mmt004. https://doi.org/10.1093/mmcts/mmt004.
of patient-specific drill-guide templates used in scoliosis cases. Zhongguo 484. Ruiz de Galarreta S, Anton R, Cazon A, Finol EA. A methodology for
Gu Shang. 2015;28:945–50. developing anisotropic AAA phantoms via additive manufacturing. J
464. Anton R, Chen C-Y, Hung M-Y, Finol EA, Pekkan K. Experimental and Biomech. 2017;57:161–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2017.04.001.
computational investigation of the patient-specific abdominal aortic 485. Schmauss D, Juchem G, Weber S, Gerber N, Hagl C, Sodian R. Three-
aneurysm pressure field. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2015;18: dimensional printing for perioperative planning of complex aortic arch
981–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/10255842.2013.865024. surgery. Ann Thorac Surg. 2014;97:2160–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
465. Bangeas P, Voulalas G, Ktenidis K. Rapid prototyping in aortic surgery. athoracsur.2014.02.011.
Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2016;22:513–4. https://doi.org/10.1093/ 486. Sodian R, Schmauss D, Schmitz C, Bigdeli A, Haeberle S, Schmoeckel M,
icvts/ivv395. Markert M, Lueth T, Freudenthal F, Reichart B, Kozlik-Feldmann R. 3-
466. Berry E, Marsden A, Dalgarno KW, Kessel D, Scott DJA. Flexible tubular dimensional printing of models to create custom-made devices for coil
replicas of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2002;216: embolization of an anastomotic leak after aortic arch replacement. Ann
211–4. https://doi.org/10.1243/0954411021536423. Thorac Surg. 2009;88:974–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2009.03.014.
467. Bisdas T, Teebken OE. Future perspectives for the role of 3D rapid 487. Sulaiman A, Boussel L, Taconnet F, Serfaty JM, Alsaid H, Attia C, Huet L,
prototyping aortic biomodels in vascular medicine. Vasa. 2011;40:427–8. Douek P. In vitro non-rigid life-size model of aortic arch aneurysm for
https://doi.org/10.1024/0301-1526/a000144. endovascular prosthesis assessment. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2008;33:53–7.
468. Burris NS, Hoff BA, Kazerooni EA, Ross BD. Vascular deformation mapping https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejcts.2007.10.016.
(VDM) of thoracic aortic enlargement in aneurysmal disease and dissection. 488. Sun X, Zhang H, Zhu K, Wang C. Patient-specific three-dimensional printing
Tomography. 2017;3:163–73. https://doi.org/10.18383/j.tom.2017.00015. for Kommerell’s diverticulum. Int J Cardiol. 2018;255:184–7. https://doi.org/
469. Chung M, Radacsi N, Robert C, McCarthy ED, Callanan A, Conlisk N, Hoskins 10.1016/j.ijcard.2017.12.065.
PR, Koutsos V. On the optimization of low-cost FDM 3D printers for accurate 489. Taher F, Falkensammer J, McCarte J, Strassegger J, Uhlmann M, Schuch P,
replication of patient-specific abdominal aortic aneurysm geometry. 3D Assadian A. The influence of prototype testing in three-dimensional aortic
Print Med. 2018;4:2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41205-017-0023-2. models on fenestrated endograft design. J Vasc Surg. 2017;65:1591–7.
470. Hertault A, Overbeck K, Sobocinski J, Azzaoui R, Fabre D, Haulon S. Recent https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2016.10.108.
developments in intraoperative imaging and navigation during aortic 490. Tam MD, Latham T, Brown JRI, Jakeways M. Use of a 3D printed hollow
interventions. J Cardiovasc Surg. 2017;58:883–8. https://doi.org/10.23736/ aortic model to assist EVAR planning in a case with complex neck anatomy:
S0021-9509.17.10075-3. potential of 3D printing to improve patient outcome. J Endovasc Ther.
471. Ho D, Squelch A, Sun Z. Modelling of aortic aneurysm and aortic dissection 2014;21:760–2. https://doi.org/10.1583/14-4810L.1.
through 3D printing. J Med Radiat Sci. 2017;64:10–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/ 491. Tam MD, Latham TR, Lewis M, Khanna K, Zaman A, Parker M, Grunwald IQ.
jmrs.212. A pilot study assessing the impact of 3-D printed models of aortic
472. Hossien A, Gesomino S, Maessen J, Autschbach R. The interactive use of aneurysms on management decisions in EVAR planning. Vasc Endovasc
multi-dimensional modeling and 3D printing in preplanning of type a aortic Surg. 2016;50:4–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/1538574415623651.
dissection. J Card Surg. 2016;31:441–5. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocs.12772. 492. Tam MDBS, Laycock SD, Brown JRI, Jakeways M. 3D printing of an aortic
473. Huang J, Li G, Wang W, Wu K, Le T. 3D printing guiding stent graft aneurysm to facilitate decision making and device selection for
fenestration: a novel technique for fenestration in endovascular aneurysm endovascular aneurysm repair in complex neck anatomy. J Endovasc Ther.
repair. Vascular. 2017;25:442–6. https://doi.org/10.1177/1708538116682913. 2013;20:863–7. https://doi.org/10.1583/13-4450MR.1.
493. Torres IO, De Luccia N. A simulator for training in endovascular aneurysm data. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2017;274:1097–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/
repair: the use of three dimensional printers. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. s00405-016-4355-0.
2017;54:247–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2017.05.011. 512. Lai SSM, Yiu BYS, Poon AKK, Yu ACH. Design of anthropomorphic flow
494. Treasure T, Takkenberg JJM, Golesworthy T, Rega F, Petrou M, Rosendahl U, phantoms based on rapid prototyping of compliant vessel geometries.
Mohiaddin R, Rubens M, Thornton W, Lees B, Pepper J. Personalised Ultrasound Med Biol. 2013;39:1654–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
external aortic root support (PEARS) in Marfan syndrome: analysis of 1-9 ultrasmedbio.2013.03.015.
year outcomes by intention-to-treat in a cohort of the first 30 consecutive 513. Xie J, Li M-H, Tan H-Q, Zhu Y-Q, Li Y-D, Fan C-H, Hu D-J, Qiao R-H.
patients to receive a novel tissue and valve-conserving procedure, Establishment of an experimental intracranial internal carotid artery model
compared with the published results of aortic root replacement. Heart. and the application in covered-stent navigability testing. AJNR Am J
2014;100:969–75. https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2013-304913. Neuroradiol. 2009;30:1041–5. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A1479.
495. Valverde I, Gomez G, Coserria JF, Suarez-Mejias C, Uribe S, Sotelo J, Velasco MN, 514. Yedavalli RV, Loth F, Yardimci A, Pritchard WF, Oshinski JN, Sadler L, Charbel
Santos De Soto J, Hosseinpour A-R, Gomez-Cia T. 3D printed models for F, Alperin N. Construction of a physical model of the human carotid artery
planning endovascular stenting in transverse aortic arch hypoplasia. Catheter based upon in vivo magnetic resonance images. J Biomech Eng. 2001;123:
Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;85:1006–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.25810. 372–6.
496. Wilasrusmee C, Suvikrom J, Suthakorn J, Lertsithichai P, Sitthiseriprapip K, Proprom 515. Abla AA, Lawton MT. Three-dimensional hollow intracranial aneurysm
N, Kittur DS. Three-dimensional aortic aneurysm model and endovascular repair: an models and their potential role for teaching, simulation, and training. World
educational tool for surgical trainees. Int J Angiol. 2008;17:129–33. Neurosurg. 2015;83:35–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2014.01.015.
497. Winder RJ, Sun Z, Kelly B, Ellis PK, Hirst D. Abdominal aortic aneurysm and 516. Andereggen L, Gralla J, Andres RH, Weber S, Schroth G, Beck J, Widmer HR,
stent graft phantom manufactured by medical rapid prototyping. J Med Reinert M, Raabe A, Peterhans M. Stereolithographic models in the
Eng Technol. 2002;26:75–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/03091900210124404. interdisciplinary planning of treatment for complex intracranial aneurysms.
498. You JH, Kang S-G, Kim BM. A novel measurement technique for the design Acta Neurochir. 2016;158:1711–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-016-2892-3.
of fenestrated stent grafts: comparison with three-dimensional aorta 517. Anderson JR, Klucznik R, Diaz O, Zhang YJ, Britz GW, Grossman RG, Karmonik
models. Exp Clin Cardiol. 2013;18:48–52. C. Quantification of velocity reduction after flow diverter placement in
499. Yuan D, Luo H, Yang H, Huang B, Zhu J, Zhao J. Precise treatment of aortic intracranial aneurysm: an ex vivo study with 3D printed replicas. Conf Proc
aneurysm by three-dimensional printing and simulation before IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2015;2015:7300–3. https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC.
endovascular intervention. Sci Rep. 2017;7:795. https://doi.org/10.1038/ 2015.7320077.
s41598-017-00644-4. 518. Anderson JR, Thompson WL, Alkattan AK, Diaz O, Klucznik R, Zhang YJ,
500. Han X, Wu X, Kelly M, Chen X. Fabrication and optimal Design of Britz GW, Grossman RG, Karmonik C. Three-dimensional printing of
Biodegradable Polymeric Stents for aneurysms treatments. J Funct Biomater. anatomically accurate, patient specific intracranial aneurysm models. J
2017;8(1):E8. https://doi.org/10.3390/jfb8010008. Neurointerv Surg. 2016;8:517–20. https://doi.org/10.1136/neurintsurg-
501. Ishibashi T, Takao H, Suzuki T, Yuki I, Kaku S, Kan I, Nishimura K, Suzuki T, 2015-011686.
Watanabe M, Karagiozov K, Murayama Y. Tailor-made shaping of 519. Benet A, Plata-Bello J, Abla AA, Acevedo-Bolton G, Saloner D, Lawton MT.
microcatheters using three-dimensional printed vessel models for Implantation of 3D-printed patient-specific aneurysm models into cadaveric
endovascular coil embolization. Comput Biol Med. 2016;77:59–63. https:// specimens: a new training paradigm to allow for improvements in
doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2016.07.005. cerebrovascular surgery and research. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:939387.
502. Lin JC, Myers E. Three-dimensional printing for preoperative planning of https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/939387.
renal artery aneurysm surgery. J Vasc Surg. 2016;64:810. https://doi.org/10. 520. Conti A, Pontoriero A, Iati G, Marino D, La Torre D, Vinci S, Germano A,
1016/j.jvs.2015.12.061. Pergolizzi S, Tomasello F. 3D-printing of arteriovenous malformations for
503. Salloum C, Lim C, Fuentes L, Osseis M, Luciani A, Azoulay D. Fusion of Radiosurgical treatment: pushing anatomy understanding to real
information from 3D printing and surgical robot: an innovative minimally boundaries. Cureus. 2016;8:e594. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.594.
technique illustrated by the resection of a large celiac trunk aneurysm. 521. Dong M, Chen G, Li J, Qin K, Ding X, Peng C, Zhou D, Lin X. Three-
World J Surg. 2016;40:245–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-015-3218-y. dimensional brain arteriovenous malformation models for clinical use and
504. Shibata E, Takao H, Amemiya S, Ohtomo K. 3D-printed visceral aneurysm resident training. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018;97:e9516. https://doi.org/10.
models based on CT data for simulations of endovascular embolization: 1097/MD.0000000000009516.
evaluation of size and shape accuracy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017;209:243– 522. Dong M, Chen G, Qin K, Ding X, Zhou D, Peng C, Zeng S, Deng X.
7. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.16.17694. Development of three-dimensional brain arteriovenous malformation model
505. Takao H, Amemiya S, Shibata E, Ohtomo K. 3D printing of preoperative for patient communication and young neurosurgeon education. Br J
simulation models of a splenic artery aneurysm. Precision and Accuracy Neurosurg. 2018:1–4. https://doi.org/10.1080/02688697.2018.1424320.
Acad Radiol. 2017;24:650–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2016.12.015. 523. Erbano BO, Opolski AC, Olandoski M, Foggiatto JA, Kubrusly LF, Dietz UA,
506. Lashkarinia SS, Piskin S, Bozkaya TA, Salihoglu E, Yerebakan C, Pekkan K. Zini C, Marinho MMMA, Leal AG, Ramina R. Rapid prototyping of three-
Computational pre-surgical planning of arterial patch reconstruction: dimensional biomodels as an adjuvant in the surgical planning for
parametric limits and in vitro validation. Ann Biomed Eng. 2018. https://doi. intracranial aneurysms. Acta Cir Bras. 2013;28:756–61.
org/10.1007/s10439-018-2043-5. 524. Frolich AMJ, Spallek J, Brehmer L, Buhk J-H, Krause D, Fiehler J, Kemmling A.
507. Shirakawa T, Yoshitatsu M, Koyama Y, Mizoguchi H, Toda K, Sawa Y. 3D- 3D printing of intracranial aneurysms using fused deposition modeling
printed aortic stenosis model with fragile and crushable calcifications for offers highly accurate replications. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2016;37:120–4.
off-the-job training and surgical simulation. Multimed Man Cardiothorac https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A4486.
Surg. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1510/mmcts.2018.018. 525. Imbesi SG, Knox K, Kerber CW. Reproducibility analysis of a new objective
508. Yang Y, Liu X, Xia Y, Liu X, Wu W, Xiong H, Zhang H, Xu L, Wong KKL, method for measuring arteriovenous malformation nidus size at
Ouyang H, Huang W. Impact of spatial characteristics in the left stenotic angiography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2002;23:412–5.
coronary artery on the hemodynamics and visualization of 3D replica 526. Kaneko N, Mashiko T, Namba K, Tateshima S, Watanabe E, Kawai K. A patient-
models. Sci Rep. 2017;7:15452. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-15620-1. specific intracranial aneurysm model with endothelial lining: a novel in vitro
509. Jones TW, Seckeler MD. Use of 3D models of vascular rings and slings to approach to bridge the gap between biology and flow dynamics. J Neurointerv
improve resident education. Congenit Heart Dis. 2017;12(5):578–82. https:// Surg. 2018;10:306–9. https://doi.org/10.1136/neurintsurg-2017-013087.
doi.org/10.1111/chd.12486. 527. Karmonik C, Anderson JR, Elias S, Klucznik R, Diaz O, Zhang YJ, Grossman
510. Cao P, Duhamel Y, Olympe G, Ramond B, Langevin F. A new production RG, Britz GW. Four-dimensional phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging
method of elastic silicone carotid phantom based on MRI acquisition using protocol optimization using patient-specific 3-dimensional printed replicas
rapid prototyping technique. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2013;2013: for in vivo imaging before and after flow diverter placement. World
5331–4. https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC.2013.6610753. Neurosurg. 2017;105:775–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2017.06.042.
511. Govsa F, Yagdi T, Ozer MA, Eraslan C, Alagoz AK. Building 3D anatomical 528. Khan IS, Kelly PD, Singer RJ. Prototyping of cerebral vasculature physical
model of coiling of the internal carotid artery derived from CT angiographic models. Surg Neurol Int. 2014;5:11. https://doi.org/10.4103/2152-7806.125858.
529. Konno T, Mashiko T, Oguma H, Kaneko N, Otani K, Watanabe E. Rapid 3- 548. Schulz-Wendtland R, Harz M, Meier-Meitinger M, Brehm B, Wacker T, Hahn
dimensional models of cerebral aneurysm for emergency surgical clipping. HK, Wagner F, Wittenberg T, Beckmann MW, Uder M, Fasching PA, Emons J.
No Shinkei Geka. 2016;44:651–60. https://doi.org/10.11477/mf.1436203350. Semi-automated delineation of breast cancer tumors and subsequent
530. Lan Q, Chen A, Zhang T, Li G, Zhu Q, Fan X, Ma C, Xu T. Development of materialization using three-dimensional printing (rapid prototyping). J Surg
three-dimensional printed Craniocerebral models for simulated Oncol. 2017;115(3):238–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.24510.
neurosurgery. World Neurosurg. 2016;91:434–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 549. Park SY, Choi CH, Park JM, Chun M, Han JH, Kim JI. A patient-specific
wneu.2016.04.069. Polylactic acid bolus made by a 3D printer for breast Cancer radiation
531. Liu Y, Gao Q, Du S, Chen Z, Fu J, Chen B, Liu Z, He Y. Fabrication of cerebral therapy. PLoS One. 2016;11(12):e0168063. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.
aneurysm simulator with a desktop 3D printer. Sci Rep. 2017;7:44301. pone.0168063.
https://doi.org/10.1038/srep44301. 550. Mehta S, Byrne N, Karunanithy N, Farhadi J. 3D printing provides unrivalled
532. Mashiko T, Kaneko N, Konno T, Otani K, Nagayama R, Watanabe E. Training bespoke teaching tools for autologous free flap breast reconstruction. J
in cerebral aneurysm clipping using self-made 3-dimensional models. J Surg Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2016;69(4):578–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.
Educ. 2017;74:681–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2016.12.010. 2015.12.026.
533. Mashiko T, Otani K, Kawano R, Konno T, Kaneko N, Ito Y, Watanabe E. 551. Park K, Park S, Jeon MJ, Choi J, Kim JW, Cho YJ, Jang WS, Keum YS, Lee IJ.
Development of three-dimensional hollow elastic model for cerebral aneurysm Clinical application of 3D-printed-step-bolus in post-total-mastectomy
clipping simulation enabling rapid and low cost prototyping. World Neurosurg. electron conformal therapy. Oncotarget. 2017;8(15):25660–8. https://doi.org/
2015;83:351–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2013.10.032. 10.18632/oncotarget.12829.
534. Namba K, Higaki A, Kaneko N, Mashiko T, Nemoto S, Watanabe E. 552. Barth RJ Jr, Krishnaswamy V, Paulsen KD, Rooney TB, Wells WA, Rizzo E,
Microcatheter shaping for intracranial aneurysm coiling using the 3- Angeles CV, Marotti JD, Zuurbier RA, Black CC. A patient-specific 3D-printed
dimensional printing rapid prototyping technology: preliminary result in the form accurately transfers supine MRI-derived tumor localization information
first 10 consecutive cases. World Neurosurg. 2015;84(1):178–86. https://doi. to guide breast-conserving surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24(10):2950–6.
org/10.1016/j.wneu.2015.03.006. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-5979-z.
535. Russ M, O’Hara R, Setlur Nagesh SV, Mokin M, Jimenez C, Siddiqui A, 553. ACR Appropriateness Criteria (2018) American college of radiology. https://
Bednarek D, Rudin S, Ionita C. Treatment planning for image-guided neuro- www.acr.org/Clinical-Resources/ACR-Appropriateness-Criteria. Accessed 30
vascular interventions using patient-specific 3D printed phantoms. Proc SPIE Jun 2018.
Int Soc Opt Eng. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2081997. 554. Rybicki FJ. The role of the ACR appropriateness criteria in the medical
536. Ryan JR, Almefty KK, Nakaji P, Frakes DH. Cerebral aneurysm clipping surgery literature. J Am Coll Radiol. 2018;15(5S):S1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2018.
simulation using patient-specific 3D printing and silicone casting. World 03.056.
Neurosurg. 2016;88:175–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2015.12.102. 555. ICD – Classification of Diseases, Functioning, and Disability (2009) National
537. Shah A, Jankharia B, Goel A. Three-dimensional model printing for surgery Center for Health Statistics, Atlanta, GA. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/icd.htm.
on arteriovenous malformations. Neurol India. 2017;65:1350–4. https://doi. Accessed 30 Jun 2018.
org/10.4103/0028-3886.217958. 556. Mankovich NJ, Cheeseman A, Stoker NG. The display of three-dimensional
538. Thawani JP, Pisapia JM, Singh N, Petrov D, Schuster JM, Hurst RW, Zager EL, anatomy with stereolithographic models. J Digit Imaging. 1990;3(3):200–3.
Pukenas BA. Three-dimensional printed modeling of an arteriovenous 557. Mankovich NJ, Cheeseman A, Stoker N. The display of three dimensional
malformation including blood flow. World Neurosurg. 2016;90:675–683.e2. anatomy with stereolithographic models. SPIE - Medical Imaging IV. 1990;
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2016.03.095. 1091:183–7.
539. Tsang ACO, Lai SSM, Chung WC, Tang AYS, Leung GKK, Poon AKK, Yu ACH, 558. Mankovich NJ, Curtis D, Kugawa T, Beumer J. Comparison of computer-
Chow KW. Blood flow in intracranial aneurysms treated with pipeline based fabrication of alloplastic cranial implants with conventional
embolization devices: computational simulation and verification with techniques. J prosthetic. Dentistry. 1985;55(5):606–9.
Doppler ultrasonography on phantom models. Ultrasonography. 2015;34: 559. Ellison JS, Montgomery JS, Hafez K, Miller DC, He C, Wolf S Jr, Weizer AZ.
98–108. https://doi.org/10.14366/usg.14063. Association of RENAL nephrectomy score with outcomes of minimally
540. Wang J-L, Yuan Z-G, Qian G-L, Bao W-Q, Jin G-L. 3D printing of intracranial invasive partial nephrectomy. Int J Urol. 2013;20:564–70.
aneurysm based on intracranial digital subtraction angiography and its 560. Simhan J, Smaldone MC, Tsai KJ, Canter DJ, Li T, Kutivok A, Viterbo R, Chen
clinical application. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018;97:e11103. https://doi.org/10. DYT, Greenberg R, Uzzo RG. Objective measures of renal mass anatomic
1097/MD.0000000000011103. complexity predict rates of major complications following partial
541. Wang L, Ye X, Hao Q, Ma L, Chen X, Wang H, Zhao Y. Three-dimensional nephrectomy. Eur Urol. 2011;60:724–30.
intracranial middle cerebral artery aneurysm models for aneurysm surgery 561. Rosenkrantz AB. Genitourinary imaging. Radiol Clin N Am. 2017;5(2):209–428.
and training. J Clin Neurosci. 2018;50:77–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn. 562. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2017. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;
2018.01.074. 67(1):7–30.
542. Weinstock P, Prabhu SP, Flynn K, Orbach DB, Smith E. Optimizing 563. Mitsouras D, Liacouras P, Imanzadeh A, Giannopoulos AA, Cai T, Kumamaru
cerebrovascular surgical and endovascular procedures in children via KK, George E, Wake N, Caterson EJ, Pomahac B, Ho VB, Grant GT, Rybicki FJ.
personalized 3D printing. J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2015;31:1–6. https://doi.org/ Medical 3D printing for the radiologist. Radiographics. 2015;35(7):1965–88.
10.3171/2015.3.PEDS14677. 564. Yoo SJ, Spray T, Austin EH 3rd, Yun TJ, van Arsdell GS. Hands-on surgical
543. Wurm G, Lehner M, Tomancok B, Kleiser R, Nussbaumer K. Cerebrovascular training of congenital heart surgery using 3-dimensional print models. J
biomodeling for aneurysm surgery: simulation-based training by means of Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2017;153(6):1530–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.
rapid prototyping technologies. Surg Innov. 2011;18:294–306. https://doi. 2016.12.054.
org/10.1177/1553350610395031. 565. Marro A, Bandukwala T, Mak W. Three-dimensional printing and medical
544. Wurm G, Tomancok B, Pogady P, Holl K, Trenkler J. Cerebrovascular imaging: a review of the methods and applications. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol.
stereolithographic biomodeling for aneurysm surgery. Technical note J 2016;45(1):2–9.
Neurosurg. 2004;100(1):139–45. 566. Matsumoto JS, Morris JM, Foley TA, Williamson EE, Leng S, McGee KP,
545. Yan L, Han X. 3-dimensional printing rapid prototyping for intracranial Kuhlmann JL, Nesberg LE, Vrtiska TJ. Three-dimensional physical modeling:
aneurysm coiling: a good example of precise medicine. World Neurosurg. applications and experience at Mayo Clinic. Radiographics. 2015;35(7):1989–
2016;86:8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2015.06.051. 2006.
546. Poulin E, Gardi L, Fenster A, Pouliot J, Beaulieu L. Towards real-time 3D 567. Huang J, Li G, Wang W, Wu K, Le T. 3D printing guiding stent graft
ultrasound planning and personalized 3D printing for breast HDR fenestration: a novel technique for fenestration in endovascular aneurysm
brachytherapy treatment. Radiother Oncol. 2015;114(3):335–8. https://doi. repair. Vascular. 2016;25(4):442–6.
org/10.1016/j.radonc.2015.02.007. 568. Velez E, Boyer N, Acevedo Bolton G, Hope MD, Boyle A. CT reconstructed
547. Chae MP, Hunter-Smith DJ, Spychal RT, Rozen WM. 3D volumetric analysis three dimensional printed models of the right subclavian artery and aorta
for planning breast reconstructive surgery. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2014; define ager elated changes and facilitate benchtop catheter testing. J
146(2):457–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-014-3028-1. Invasive Cardiol. 2014;26(10):E1414.
569. Girsowicz E, Georg Y, Seiller H, Lejay A, Thaveau F, Heim F, Chakfe N.

Evaluation of nitinol stents using a 3-dimensional printed superficial femoral
artery model: a preliminary study. Ann Vasc Surg. 2016;33:1–10.
570. Noone AM, Howlader N, Krapcho M, Miller D, Brest A, Yu M, Ruhl J,
Tatalovich Z, Mariotto A, Lewis DR, Chen HS, Feuer EJ, Cronin KA, editors.
SEER Cancer statistics review, 1975–2015. Bethesda: National Cancer
Institute; 2018.
571. Toriola AT, Colditz GA. Trends in breast cancer incidence and mortality in
the United States: implications for prevention. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;
138(3):665–73.
572. Giuliano AE, Connolly JL, Edge SB, Mittendorf EA, Rugo HS, Solin LJ, Weaver
DL, Winchester DJ, Hortobagyi GN. Breast Cancer-major changes in the
American joint committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual.
CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67(4):290–303.
573. Rungruang B, Kelley JL. Benign breast diseases: epidemiology, evaluation,
and management. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2011;54(1):110–24.
574. Goehring C, Morabia A. Epidemiology of benign breast disease, with special
attention to histologic types. Epidemiol Rev. 1997;19(2):310–27.
575. Parker SJ, Wheaton M, Wallis MG, Harries SA. Why should diagnostic benign
breast biopsies weight less than twenty grams? Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2001;
83(2):113–6.
576. Litwin MS, Tan HJ. The diagnosis and treatment of prostate Cancer: a
review. JAMA. 2017;317(24):2532–42.
577. Giannopoulos AA, Mitsouras D, Yoo SJ, Liu PP, Chatzizisis YS, Rybicki FJ.
Applications of 3D printing in cardiovascular diseases. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2016;
13(12):701–18.
578. Christensen A, Rybicki FJ. Maintaining safety and efficacy for 3D printing in
medicine. 3D Print Med. 2017;3:1.
579. Di Prima M, Coburn J, Hwang D, Kelly J, Khairuzzaman A, Ricles L. Additively
manufactured medical products–the FDA perspective. 3D Print Med. 2015;
2(1):1–6.
580. FDA. Technical Considerations for Additive Manufactured Devices. https://
www.fda.gov/downloads/medicaldevices/deviceregulationandguidance/
guidancedocuments/ucm499809.pdf. Accessed 06 June 2018.
581. Leng S, McGee K, Morris J, Alexander A, Kuhlmann J, Vrieze T, McCollough
CH, Matsumoto J. Anatomic modeling using 3D printing: quality assurance
and optimization. 3D Print Med. 2017;3:6.
582. George E, Liacouras P, Rybicki FJ, Mitsouras D. Measuring and establishing
the accuracy and reproducibility of 3D printed medical models.
Radiographics. 2017;37(5):1424–50.
583. Cai T, Rybicki FJ, Giannopoulos AA, Schultz K, Kumamaru KK, Liacouras P,
Demehri S, Small KM, Mitsouras D. The residual STL volume as a metric to
evaluate accuracy and reproducibility of anatomic models for 3D printing:
application in the validation of 3D-printable models of maxillofacial bone
from reduced radiation dose CT images. 3D Print Med. 2015;1:2.
584. Giannopoulos AA, Chepelev L, Sheikh A, Wang A, Dang W, Akyuz E, Hong C,
Wake N, Pietila P, Dydynski PB, Mitsouras D, Rybicki FJ. 3D printed ventricular
septal defect patch: a primer for the 2015 Radiological Society of North
America (RSNA) hands-on course in 3D printing. 3D Print Med. 2015;1:3.
585. Chepelev L, Hodgdon T, Gupta A, Wang A, Torres C, Krishna S, Akyuz E,
Mitsouras D, Sheikh A. Medical 3D printing for vascular interventions and
surgical oncology: a primer for the 2016 radiological society of North
America (RSNA) hands-on course in 3D printing. 3D Print Med. 2016;2:5.
586. Chepelev L, Souza C, Althobaity W, Miguel O, Krishna S, Akyuz E, Hodgdon
T, Torres C, Wake N, Alexander A, George E, Tang A, Liacouras P, Matsumoto
J, Morris J, Christensen A, Mitsouras D, Rybicki F, Sheik A. Preoperative
planning and tracheal stent design in thoracic surgery: a primer for the
2017 Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) hands-on course in 3D
printing. 3D Print Med. 2017;3:14.

s41205 018 0030 y PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

s41205 018 0030 y PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

s41205 018 0030 y PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chepelev et al.

3D Printing in Medicine (2018) 4:11

RESEARCH Open Access

Radiological Society of North America

Background Printing) described for proposed new billing codes, in-

Pre-operative planning Congenital heart disease

Malformations, 3) Acquired/Developmental Deformities planning combined with patient-matched implants or

AND (hypoplastic left)) OR ((rapid prototyping) AND Results: [23, 28]

dimensional”[All Fields]) OR “three-dimensional printin- OR (“aortic”[All Fields] AND “dissection”[All Fields])

569. Girsowicz E, Georg Y, Seiller H, Lejay A, Thaveau F, Heim F, Chakfe N.

You might also like