Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29312871›Full record

ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2017

Patient-specific three-dimensional printing for pre-surgical planning in hepatocellular carcinoma treatment.

Elizabeth Perica, Zhonghua Sun

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

48 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 112 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Elizabeth PericaDepartment of Medical Radiation Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, Australia.
Zhonghua SunDepartment of Medical Radiation Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, Australia.
Curtin University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecently, three-dimensional (3D) printing has shown great interest in medicine, and 3D printed models may be rendered as part of the pre-surgical planning process in order to better understand the complexities of an individual's anatomy. The aim of this study is to investigate the feasibility of utilising 3D printed liver models as clinical tools in pre-operative planning for resectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) lesions.

methodsHigh-resolution contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) images were acquired and utilized to generate a patient-specific 3D printed liver model. Hepatic structures were segmented and edited to produce a printable model delineating intrahepatic anatomy and a resectable HCC lesion. Quantitative assessment of 3D model accuracy compared measurements of critical anatomical landmarks acquired from the original CT images, standard tessellation language (STL) files, and the 3D printed liver model. Comparative analysis of surveys completed by two radiologists investigated the clinical value of 3D printed liver models in radiology. The application of utilizing 3D printed liver models as tools in surgical planning for resectable HCC lesions was evaluated through kappa analysis of questionnaires completed by two abdominal surgeons.

resultsA scaled down multi-material 3D liver model delineating patient-specific hepatic anatomy and pathology was produced, requiring a total production time of 25.25 hours and costing a total of AUD $1,250. A discrepancy was found in the total mean of measurements at each stage of production, with a total mean of 18.28±9.31 mm for measurements acquired from the original CT data, 15.63±8.06 mm for the STL files, and 14.47±7.71 mm for the 3D printed liver model. The 3D liver model did not enhance the radiologists' perception of patient-specific anatomy or pathology. Kappa analysis of the surgeon's responses to survey questions yielded a percentage agreement of 80%, and a κ value of 0.38 (P=0.24) indicating fair agreement.

conclusionsStudy outcomes indicate that there is minimal value in utilizing the 3D printed models in diagnostic radiology. The potential usefulness of utilizing patient-specific 3D printed liver models as tools in surgical planning and intraoperative guidance for HCC treatment is verified. However, the feasibility of this application is currently challenged by identified limitations in 3D model production, including the cost and time required for model production, and inaccuracies potentially introduced at each stage of model fabrication.

Indexed as

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)livermodelsurgical planningthree-dimensional printing (3D printing)

Identifiers

PMID29312871
PMCPMC5756786
OpenAlexW2774192878

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.