Comparison of 3D printing model to 3D virtual reconstruction and 2D imaging for the clinical education of interns in hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND: The clinical education of interns on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is both crucial and difficult in China, even if the education reform has advanced constantly over the years. The value of specific 3D printing model (3DPM) in clinical education of HCC is uncertain, and relevant literatures are very few. This study aimed to explore the effects of a patient-specific 3D printing liver model on the clinical education of HCC. METHODS: Three laparoscopic hepatectomies were collected. For each case, a 3D virtual reconstruction (3DVR) and 3DPM were created using multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) data, respectively. A total of 62 interns were randomly assigned to each group (3DPM, 3DVR, and MDCT groups) through a table of random numbers for random grouping. Following lecture-based HCC education, interns in each group selected a corresponding model of HCC. All interns were tested on the hepatic tumor locations, the vessels adjacent to them, surgical planning, and test time using the centesimal system score within 90 min. A questionnaire investigation on the degree of satisfaction, interest, and helpfulness for improving the comprehension ability of liver anatomy and 3D spatial structures was also recorded. The 3DPM group were compared with both 3DVR and MDCT group by theoretical examination scores and questionnaire survey satisfaction to evaluate the effects of 3DPM on the interns’ clinical education in HCC. RESULTS: All the interns completed the test and questionnaire. The 3DPM group gained significantly higher scores on the following test contents: indicating the correct tumor location (3DPM vs. 3DVR, MDCT: 36.7±4.8 vs. 33.2±5.8, 26.8±10.0, P=0.03, P<0.01, respectively), accurately identifying the relationship between the tumor and vessels (3DPM vs. 3DVR, MDCT: 37.1±4.6 vs. 31.6±3.7, 30.0±5.8, P<0.01, P<0.01, respectively), and designing appropriate surgical plans (3DPM vs. 3DVR, MDCT: 8±2.7 vs. 4.9±2.7, 5.9±3.8, P<0.01, P=0.04, respectively). The 3DPM group showed a higher degree of satisfaction (86.2%), interest (92.1%), and helpfulness (80.5%) for improving the comprehension ability of liver anatomy and 3D spatial structures. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical teaching by utilizing 3DPM can significantly improve the professional theoretical level, strengthen clinical thinking and comprehensive ability, and improve the teaching effects of HCC for medical interns.