3D Printing for Complex Cranial Surgery Education: Technical Overview and Preliminary Validation Study

Abstract

Background 3D printing—also known as additive manufacturing—has a wide range of applications. Reproduction of low-cost, high-fidelity, disease- or patient-specific models presents a key developmental area in simulation and education research for complex cranial surgery.

Methods Using cadaveric dissections as source materials, skull base models were created, printed, and tested for educational value in teaching complex cranial approaches. In this pilot study, assessments were made on the value of 3D printed models demonstrating the retrosigmoid and posterior petrosectomy approaches. Models were assessed and tested in a small cohort of neurosurgery resident subjects (n = 3) using a series of 10 radiographic and 2 printed case examples, with efficacy determined via agreement survey and approach selection accuracy.

Results All subjects indicated agreement or strong agreement for all study endpoints that 3D printed models provided significant improvements in understanding of neuroanatomic relationships and principles of approach selection, as compared to 2D dissections or patient cross-sectional imaging alone. Models were not superior to in-person hands-on teaching. Mean approach selection accuracy was 90% (±13%) for 10 imaging-based cases, or 92% (±7%) overall. Trainees strongly agreed that approach decision-making was enhanced by adjunctive use of 3D models for both radiographic and printed cases.

Conclusion 3D printed models incorporating skull base approaches and/or pathologies provide a compelling addition to the complex cranial education armamentarium. Based on our preliminary analysis, 3D printed models offer substantial potential for pedagogical value as dissection guides, adjuncts to preoperative study and case preparation, or tools for approach selection training and evaluation.

Keywords

neuroanatomy - 3D printing - skull base - cerebrovascular - complex cranial surgery - pedagogy - simulation

Note

Components of this manuscript were presented as an abstract at the North American Skull Base Society 2019 Annual Meeting in Orlando, FL.

Publication History

Received: 20 April 2020

Accepted: 27 November 2020

Article published online:
22 February 2021

• References

• 1 Graffeo CS, Peris-Celda M, Perry A, Carlstrom LP, Driscoll CLW, Link MJ. Anatomical step-by-step dissection of complex skull base approaches for trainees: surgical anatomy of the posterior petrosal approach. J Neurol Surg B Skull Base 2019; 80 (04) 338-351
• 2 Graffeo CS, Peris-Celda M, Perry A, Carlstrom LP, Driscoll CLW, Link MJ. Anatomical Step-by-Step Dissection of Complex Skull Base Approaches for Trainees: Surgical Anatomy of the Retrosigmoid Approach. J Neurol Surg B Skull Base 2019; 80 (04) 338-351
• 3 Leonel LCPC, Carlstrom LP, Graffeo CS. et al. Foundations of advanced neuroanatomy: technical guidelines for specimen preparation, dissection, and 3d-photodocumentation in a surgical anatomy laboratory. J Neurol Surg B Skull Base 2021; 82 (Suppl. 03) e248-e255
• 4 Baskaran V, Štrkalj G, Štrkalj M, Di Ieva A. Current applications and future perspectives of the use of 3D printing in anatomical training and neurosurgery. Front Neuroanat 2016; 10: 69
• 5 Matsumoto JS, Morris JM, Foley TA. et al. Three-dimensional physical modeling: applications and experience at Mayo Clinic. Radiographics 2015; 35 (07) 1989-2006
• 6 Ploch CC, Mansi CSSA, Jayamohan J, Kuhl E. Using 3D printing to create personalized brain models for neurosurgical training and preoperative planning. World Neurosurg 2016; 90: 668-674
• 7 Pucci JU, Christophe BR, Sisti JA, Connolly Jr ES. Three-dimensional printing: technologies, applications, and limitations in neurosurgery. Biotechnol Adv 2017; 35 (05) 521-529
• 8 Randazzo M, Pisapia JM, Singh N, Thawani JP. 3D printing in neurosurgery: a systematic review. Surg Neurol Int 2016; 7 (Suppl. 33) S801-S809
• 9 Vakharia VN, Vakharia NN, Hill CS. Review of 3-dimensional printing on cranial neurosurgery simulation training. World Neurosurg 2016; 88: 188-198
• 10 Waran V, Narayanan V, Karuppiah R, Owen SLF, Aziz T. Utility of multimaterial 3D printers in creating models with pathological entities to enhance the training experience of neurosurgeons. J Neurosurg 2014; 120 (02) 489-492
• 11 Marks M, Alexander A, Matsumoto J. et al. Creating three dimensional models of Alzheimer's disease. 3D Print Med 2017; 3 (01) 13
• 12 Dedy NJ, Bonrath EM, Zevin B, Grantcharov TP. Teaching nontechnical skills in surgical residency: a systematic review of current approaches and outcomes. Surgery 2013; 154 (05) 1000-1008
• 13 Flin R, Youngson G, Yule S. How do surgeons make intraoperative decisions?. Qual Saf Health Care 2007; 16 (03) 235-239
• 14 Flin R, Yule S, Paterson-Brown S, Maran N, Rowley D, Youngson G. Teaching surgeons about non-technical skills. Surgeon 2007; 5 (02) 86-89
• 15 Langridge B, Momin S, Coumbe B, Woin E, Griffin M, Butler P. Systematic review of the use of 3-dimensional printing in surgical teaching and assessment. J Surg Educ 2018; 75 (01) 209-221
• 16 The American Board of Neurological Surgery, Inc.. ABNS PGY2 Neuroanatomy Exam: First test is planned for July 2020. 2019 Accessed December 17, 2020: https://www.abns.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/neuroanatomyexam.pdf
• 17 Nguyen N, Nelson AJ, Wilson TD. Computer visualizations: factors that influence spatial anatomy comprehension. Anat Sci Educ 2012; 5 (02) 98-108
• 18 Petersson H, Sinkvist D, Wang C, Smedby O. Web-based interactive 3D visualization as a tool for improved anatomy learning. Anat Sci Educ 2009; 2 (02) 61-68
• 19 Sugand K, Abrahams P, Khurana A. The anatomy of anatomy: a review for its modernization. Anat Sci Educ 2010; 3 (02) 83-93
• 20 Klatzky RL, Lederman SJ, Matula DE. Haptic exploration in the presence of vision. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 1993; 19 (04) 726-743
• 21 Klatzky RL, Lederman SJ, Matula DE. Imagined haptic exploration in judgments of object properties. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 1991; 17 (02) 314-322
• 22 Wijntjes MWA, Volcic R, Pont SC, Koenderink JJ, Kappers AML. Haptic perception disambiguates visual perception of 3D shape. Exp Brain Res 2009; 193 (04) 639-644