Three-dimensional printing in medicine: a systematic review of pediatric applications.

backgroundThree-dimensional printing (3DP) addresses distinct clinical challenges in pediatric care including: congenital variants, compact anatomy, high procedural risk, and growth over time. We hypothesized that patient-specific applications of 3DP in pediatrics could be categorized into concise, discrete categories of use.

methodsTerms related to "three-dimensional printing" and "pediatrics" were searched on PubMed, Scopus, Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science. Initial search yielded 2122 unique articles; 139 articles characterizing 508 patients met full inclusion criteria.

resultsFour categories of patient-specific 3DP applications were identified: Teaching of families and medical staff (9.3%); Developing intervention strategies (33.9%); Procedural applications, including subtypes: contour models, guides, splints, and implants (43.0%); and Material manufacturing of shaping devices or prosthetics (14.0%). Procedural comparative studies found 3DP devices to be equivalent or better than conventional methods, with less operating time and fewer complications.

conclusionPatient-specific applications of Three-Dimensional Printing in Medicine can be elegantly classified into four major categories: Teaching, Developing, Procedures, and Materials, sharing the same TDPM acronym. Understanding this schema is important because it promotes further innovation and increased implementation of these devices to improve pediatric care. IMPACT: This article classifies the pediatric applications of patient-specific three-dimensional printing. This is a first comprehensive review of patient-specific three-dimensional printing in both pediatric medical and surgical disciplines, incorporating previously described classification schema to create one unifying paradigm. Understanding these applications is important since three-dimensional printing addresses challenges that are uniquely pediatric including compact anatomy, unique congenital variants, greater procedural risk, and growth over time. We identified four classifications of patient-specific use: teaching, developing, procedural, and material uses. By classifying these applications, this review promotes understanding and incorporation of this expanding technology to improve the pediatric care.