ArticlePloS one2024
Accuracy and feasibility in building a personalized 3D printed femoral pseudoaneurysm model for endovascular training.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe use of three-dimensional(3D) printing is broadly across many medical specialties. It is an innovative, and rapidly growing technology to produce custom anatomical models and medical conditions models for medical teaching, surgical planning, and patient education. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and feasibility of 3D printing in creating a superficial femoral artery pseudoaneurysm model based on CT scans for endovascular training.
methodsA case of a left superficial femoral artery pseudoaneurysm was selected, and the 3D model was created using DICOM files imported into Materialise Mimics 22.0 and Materialise 3-Matic software, then printed using vat polymerization technology. Two 3D-printed models were created, and a series of comparisons were conducted between the 3D segmented images from CT scans and these two 3D-printed models. Ten comparisons involving internal diameters and angles of the specific anatomical location were measured.
resultsThe study found that the absolute mean difference in diameter between the 3D segmented images and the 3D printed models was 0.179±0.145 mm and 0.216±0.143mm, respectively, with no significant difference between the two sets of models. Additionally, the absolute mean difference in angle was 0.99±0.65° and 1.00±0.91°, respectively, and the absolute mean difference in angle between the two sets of data was not significant. Bland-Altman analysis confirmed a high correlation in dimension measurements between the 3D-printed models and segmented images. Furthermore, the accuracy of a 3D-printed femoral pseudoaneurysm model was further tested through the simulation of a superficial femoral artery pseudoaneurysm coiling procedure using the Philips Azurion7 in the angiography room.
conclusions3D printing is a reliable technique for producing a high accuracy 3D anatomical model that closely resemble a patient's anatomy based on CT images. Additionally, 3D printing is a feasible and viable option for use in endovascular training and medical education. In general, 3D printing is an encouraging technology with diverse possibilities in medicine, including surgical planning, medical education, and medical device advancement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.