Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.5999/aps.2020.00829
The utility of three-dimensional models in complex microsurgical reconstruction
Background Three-dimensional (3D) model printing improves visualization of anatomical structures in space compared to two-dimensional (2D) data and creates an exact model of the surgical site that can be used for reference during surgery. There is limited evidence on the effects of using 3D models in microsurgical reconstruction on improving clinical outcomes.
Methods A retrospective review of patients undergoing reconstructive breast microsurgery procedures from 2017 to 2019 who received computed tomography angiography (CTA) scans only or with 3D models for preoperative surgical planning were performed. Preoperative decision-making to undergo a deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) versus muscle-sparing transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (MS-TRAM) flap, as well as whether the decision changed during flap harvest and postoperative complications were tracked based on the preoperative imaging used. In addition, we describe three example cases showing direct application of 3D mold as an accurate model to guide intraoperative dissection in complex microsurgical reconstruction.
Results Fifty-eight abdominal-based breast free-flaps performed using conventional CTA were compared with a matched cohort of 58 breast free-flaps performed with 3D model print. There was no flap loss in either group. There was a significant reduction in flap harvest time with use of 3D model (CTA vs. 3D, 117.7±14.2 minutes vs. 109.8±11.6 minutes; P=0.001). In addition, there was no change in preoperative decision on type of flap harvested in all cases in 3D print group (0%), compared with 24.1% change in conventional CTA group.
Conclusions Use of 3D print model improves accuracy of preoperative planning and reduces flap harvest time with similar postoperative complications in complex microsurgical reconstruction.
The study was presented at the PRS Korea 2018 Meeting on November 9-11, 2018, in Seoul, Korea.
Publication History
Received: 13 May 2020
Accepted: 29 July 2020
Article published online:
22 March 2022
© 2020. The Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, permitting unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)
Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA
-
REFERENCES
- 1 Chang EI, Chu CK, Chang EI. Advancements in imaging technology for microvascular free tissue transfer. J Surg Oncol 2018; 118: 729-35
- 2 Gillis JA, Morris SF. Three-dimensional printing of perforator vascular anatomy. Plast Reconstr Surg 2014; 133: 80e-82e
- 3 Sotsuka Y, Matsuda K, Fujita K. et al. A perforator model as an aid to elevate deep inferior epigastric perforator flap. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2015; 3: e462
- 4 Casey 3rd WJ, Chew RT, Rebecca AM. et al. Advantages of preoperative computed tomography in deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2009; 123: 1148-55
- 5 Granzow JW, Levine JL, Chiu ES. et al. Breast reconstruction with the deep inferior epigastric perforator flap: history and an update on current technique. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2006; 59: 571-9
- 6 Smit JM, Klein S, Werker PM. An overview of methods for vascular mapping in the planning of free flaps. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2010; 63: e674-82
- 7 Clavero JA, Masia J, Larranaga J. et al. MDCT in the preoperative planning of abdominal perforator surgery for postmastectomy breast reconstruction. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008; 191: 670-6
- 8 Rengier F, Mehndiratta A, von Tengg-Kobligk H. et al. 3D printing based on imaging data: review of medical applications. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 2010; 5: 335-41
- 9 Matsumoto JS, Morris JM, Rose PS. 3-Dimensional printed anatomic models as planning aids in complex oncology surgery. JAMA Oncol 2016; 2: 1121-2
- 10 Anderson JR, Thompson WL, Alkattan AK. et al. Three-dimensional printing of anatomically accurate, patient specific intracranial aneurysm models. J Neurointerv Surg 2016; 8: 517-20
- 11 Marconi S, Pugliese L, Botti M. et al. Value of 3D printing for the comprehension of surgical anatomy. Surg Endosc 2017; 31: 4102-10
- 12 Chen S, Pan Z, Wu Y. et al. The role of three-dimensional printed models of skull in anatomy education: a randomized controlled trail. Sci Rep 2017; 7: 575
- 13 Pujol S, Baldwin M, Nassiri J. et al. Using 3D modeling techniques to enhance teaching of difficult anatomical concepts. Acad Radiol 2016; 23: 507-16
- 14 Jablonka EM, Wu RT, Mittermiller PA. et al. 3-DIEPrinting: 3D-printed models to assist the intramuscular dissection in abdominally based microsurgical breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2019; 7: e2222
- 15 Garcia-Tutor E, Romeo M, Chae MP. et al. 3D volumetric modeling and microvascular reconstruction of irradiated lumbosacral defects after oncologic resection. Front Surg 2016; 3: 66
- 16 Taylor EM, Iorio ML. Surgeon-based 3D printing for microvascular bone flaps. J Reconstr Microsurg 2017; 33: 441-5
- 17 Mehta S, Byrne N, Karunanithy N. et al. 3D printing provides unrivalled bespoke teaching tools for autologous free flap breast reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2016; 69: 578-80
- 18 Kamali P, Paul MA, Ibrahim AMS. et al. National and regional differences in 32,248 postmastectomy autologous breast reconstruction using the updated national inpatient survey. Ann Plast Surg 2017; 78: 717-22
- 19 Ma L, Zhou Y, Zhu Y. et al. 3D-printed guiding templates for improved osteosarcoma resection. Sci Rep 2016; 6: 23335