Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31309016›Full record

ArticleCureus2019

The Future of Biomechanical Spine Research: Conception and Design of a Dynamic 3D Printed Cervical Myelography Phantom.

William Clifton, Eric Nottmeier, Aaron Damon, Conrad Dove, Mark Pichelmann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
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

5 authors.

William CliftonNeurosurgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, USA.
Eric NottmeierNeurosurgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA.
Aaron DamonNeurosurgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, USA.
Conrad DoveNeurosurgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA.
Mark PichelmannNeurosurgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Three-dimensional (3D) printing is a growing practice in the medical community for patient care and trainee education as well as production of equipment and devices. The development of functional models to replicate physiologic systems of human tissue has also been explored, although to a lesser degree. Specifically, the design of 3D printed phantoms that possess comparable biomechanical properties to human cervical vertebrae is an underdeveloped area of spine research. In order to investigate the functional uses of cervical 3D printed models for replicating the complex physiologic and biomechanical properties of the human subaxial cervical spine, our institution has created a prototype that accurately reflects these properties and provides a novel method of assessing spinal canal dimensions using simulated myelography. To our knowledge, this is the first 3D printed phantom created to study these parameters. Materials and methods A de-identified cervical spine computed tomography imaging file was segmented using threshold modulation in 3D Slicer software. The subaxial vertebrae (C3-C7) of the scan were individualized by separating the facet joint spaces and uncovertebral joints within the software in order to create individual stereolithography (STL) files. Each individual vertebra was printed on an Ultimaker S5 dual-extrusion printer using white "tough" polylactic acid filament. A human cadaveric subaxial cervical spine was harvested to provide a control for our experiment. Both models were assessed and compared in flexion and extension dynamic motion grossly and fluoroscopically. The maximum angles of deformation on X-ray imaging were recorded using DICOM (Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine) viewing software. In order to compare the ability to assess canal dimensions of the models using fluoroscopic imaging, a myelography simulation was designed. Results The cervical phantom demonstrated excellent ability to resist deformation in flexion and extension positions, attributed to the high quality of initial segmentation. The gross and fluoroscopic dynamic movement of the phantom was analogous to the cadaver model. The myelography simulator adequately demonstrated the canal dimensions in static and dynamic positions for both models. Pertinent anatomic landmarks were able to be effectively visualized for assessment of canal measurements for sagittal and transverse dimensions. Conclusions By utilizing the latest technologies in DICOM segmentation and 3D printing, our institution has created the first cervical myelography phantom for biomechanical evaluation and trainee instruction. By combining new technologies with anatomical knowledge, quality 3D printing shows great promise in becoming a standard player in the future of spinal biomechanical research.

Indexed as

3d printingbiomechanicscervicalfluoroscopymyelographyphantom designspinespine biomechanics

Identifiers

PMID31309016
PMCPMC6609301

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.