Impact of 3D Printing Technology on Comprehension of Surgical Anatomy of Retroperitoneal Tumor
Impact of 3D Printing Technology on Comprehension of Surgical Anatomy of Retroperitoneal Tumor
复制标题
3D打印技术对腹膜后肿瘤手术解剖结构理解的影响
DOI：
10.1007/s00268-018-4489-x
复制
发表时间：
2018-08-01
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Zou, Yan
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Yang, Tianyou;Lin, Shuwen;Zou, Yan
ObjectivesTo investigate the impact of the 3D printed model on understanding of surgical anatomy of retroperitoneal tumor.Materials and Methods3D model printed，based on multi-detector computed tomography（MDCT）of a retroperitoneal tumor.参与者（10名学生，10名居民和10名外科医生）被要求分别在查看MDCT图像，3D可视化模型和3D打印模型后识别在肿瘤切除中重要的血管。关于这个肿瘤，选择左肾静脉（LRV）、右肾蒂（RRP）和下腔静脉（IVC）作为评估参与者表现的指标。评价血管的识别并给出评分（1分=成功; 0分=失败）。正确识别的总数和百分比被用来衡量这三种类型的解剖介绍是如何能够转移的解剖识别。结果在3D打印、3D可视化和MDCT之间的总体比较分析中，同时识别所有三种血管的识别率分别为83. 33、73. 33和46. 67 LRV的识别率分别为90%、80%和63.33%（P= 0.007 RRP的识别率分别为96.67%、83.33%和73.33%（P= 0.043 IVC的识别率分别为93.33%、90%和80%（P= 0.366）。在亚组分析的三组参与者的表现，解剖识别之间没有显着差异观察MDCT，3D可视化和3D打印模型为每组participant.ConclusionThree-dimensional打印模型提高了腹膜后肿瘤的外科解剖的理解。
ObjectivesTo investigate the impact of 3D printed model on understanding of surgical anatomy of retroperitoneal tumor.Materials and methodsThree-dimensional model was printed, based on multi-detectors computed tomography (MDCT) of a retroperitoneal tumor. Participants (10 students, 10 residents and 10 surgeons) were asked to identify vasculatures which were important in resection of the tumor, after viewing MDCT images, 3D visualization model and 3D printed model, respectively. Regarding this tumor, left renal vein (LRV), right renal pedicles (RRP) and inferior vena cava (IVC) were chosen as indicators to assess participants’ performances. Identification of vasculatures was evaluated and a score was given (1 point = success; 0 point = failure). The total number and percentage of correct identification were used to measure how these three types of anatomic presentation were able to transfer in terms of anatomical recognition. Recorded data were analyzed both pooling together data from three groups of participants and separately for each group.ResultsIn analysis of overall comparison among 3D printing, 3D visualization and MDCT, recognition of all three vasculatures simultaneously was 83.33, 73.33 and 46.67%, respectively (P= 0.007); recognition of LRV was 90, 80 and 63.33% (P= 0.043), respectively; recognition of RRP was 96.67, 83.33 and 73.33% (P= 0.035), respectively; recognition of IVC was 93.33, 90 and 80% (P= 0.366), respectively. In subgroup analysis of performances of three groups of participants, no significant differences regarding anatomic recognition were observed among MDCT, 3D visualization and 3D printed model for each group of participants.ConclusionThree-dimensional printed model improved the understanding of surgical anatomy of retroperitoneal tumor.