Cargando…
3D printing in fracture treatment: Current practice and best practice consensus
The use of 3D printing in orthopedic trauma is supported by clinical evidence. Existing computed tomography (CT) data are exploited for better stereotactic identification of morphological features of the fracture and enhanced surgical planning. Due to complex logistic, technical and resource constra...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Medizin
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9722822/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35817874 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00113-022-01159-y |
_version_ | 1784844041258532864 |
---|---|
author | Fang, Christian Cai, Leyi Chu, Gabriel Jarayabhand, Rahat Kim, Ji Wan O’Neill, Gavin |
author_facet | Fang, Christian Cai, Leyi Chu, Gabriel Jarayabhand, Rahat Kim, Ji Wan O’Neill, Gavin |
author_sort | Fang, Christian |
collection | PubMed |
description | The use of 3D printing in orthopedic trauma is supported by clinical evidence. Existing computed tomography (CT) data are exploited for better stereotactic identification of morphological features of the fracture and enhanced surgical planning. Due to complex logistic, technical and resource constraints, deployment of 3D printing is not straightforward from the hospital management perspective. As a result not all trauma surgeons are able to confidently integrate 3D printing into the daily practice. We carried out an expert panel survey on six trauma units which utilized 3D printing routinely. The most frequent indications are acetabular and articular fractures and malalignments. Infrastructure and manpower structure varied between units. The installation of industrial grade machines and dedicated software as well as the use of trained personnel can enhance the capacity and reliability of fracture treatment. Setting up interdisciplinary jointly used 3d printing departments with sound financial and management structures may improve sustainability. The sometimes substantial logistic and technical barriers which impede the rapid delivery of 3D printed models are discussed. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00113-022-01159-y) also contains details of the data collected during the survey. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9722822 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer Medizin |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-97228222022-12-07 3D printing in fracture treatment: Current practice and best practice consensus Fang, Christian Cai, Leyi Chu, Gabriel Jarayabhand, Rahat Kim, Ji Wan O’Neill, Gavin Unfallchirurgie (Heidelb) Leitthema The use of 3D printing in orthopedic trauma is supported by clinical evidence. Existing computed tomography (CT) data are exploited for better stereotactic identification of morphological features of the fracture and enhanced surgical planning. Due to complex logistic, technical and resource constraints, deployment of 3D printing is not straightforward from the hospital management perspective. As a result not all trauma surgeons are able to confidently integrate 3D printing into the daily practice. We carried out an expert panel survey on six trauma units which utilized 3D printing routinely. The most frequent indications are acetabular and articular fractures and malalignments. Infrastructure and manpower structure varied between units. The installation of industrial grade machines and dedicated software as well as the use of trained personnel can enhance the capacity and reliability of fracture treatment. Setting up interdisciplinary jointly used 3d printing departments with sound financial and management structures may improve sustainability. The sometimes substantial logistic and technical barriers which impede the rapid delivery of 3D printed models are discussed. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00113-022-01159-y) also contains details of the data collected during the survey. Springer Medizin 2022-07-11 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9722822/ /pubmed/35817874 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00113-022-01159-y Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Leitthema Fang, Christian Cai, Leyi Chu, Gabriel Jarayabhand, Rahat Kim, Ji Wan O’Neill, Gavin 3D printing in fracture treatment: Current practice and best practice consensus |
title | 3D printing in fracture treatment: Current practice and best practice consensus |
title_full | 3D printing in fracture treatment: Current practice and best practice consensus |
title_fullStr | 3D printing in fracture treatment: Current practice and best practice consensus |
title_full_unstemmed | 3D printing in fracture treatment: Current practice and best practice consensus |
title_short | 3D printing in fracture treatment: Current practice and best practice consensus |
title_sort | 3d printing in fracture treatment: current practice and best practice consensus |
topic | Leitthema |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9722822/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35817874 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00113-022-01159-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT fangchristian 3dprintinginfracturetreatmentcurrentpracticeandbestpracticeconsensus AT caileyi 3dprintinginfracturetreatmentcurrentpracticeandbestpracticeconsensus AT chugabriel 3dprintinginfracturetreatmentcurrentpracticeandbestpracticeconsensus AT jarayabhandrahat 3dprintinginfracturetreatmentcurrentpracticeandbestpracticeconsensus AT kimjiwan 3dprintinginfracturetreatmentcurrentpracticeandbestpracticeconsensus AT oneillgavin 3dprintinginfracturetreatmentcurrentpracticeandbestpracticeconsensus |