Download PDF
Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2022; 35(06): 398-402
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1756517
Original Research

Accuracy of the Surface Contour of Three-Dimensional-Printed Canine Pelvic Replicas

Lu Ming 
1   Oregon State University, Magruder Hall, Corvallis, Oregon, United States
,
Griselda Lam
2   VCA London Regional Veterinary Emergency and Referral Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada
,
Junemoe Jeong
3   Gwangju Animal Medical Center, Gwangju, Korea (the Republic of)
,
Kim Sun Young 
4   College of Veterinary Medicine, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, United States
› Author Affiliations Funding There are no funders to report for this submission. M.L. reported support for attending meetings and/or travel, travel grant for presenting the study in the poster session in ACVS 2019 Surgery Summit, by University of Saskatchewan student travel grant.
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective The aim of this study was to determine the differences in surface contour between models of native pelvic bones and their corresponding three-dimensional (3D)-printed replicas.

Study Design Digital 3D models of five cadaveric hemipelves and five live dogs with contralateral pelvic fractures were generated based on computed tomographic images and 3D printed. The 3D-printed replicas underwent 3D scanning and digital 3D models of the replicas were created. The digital 3D model of each replica was superimposed onto the model of the native hemipelvis. Errors in the replicas were determined by comparing the distances of 120,000 corresponding surface points between models. The medial surface, lateral surface and dorsal surface of the acetabulum (DSA) of each hemipelvis were selected for further analysis. The root mean square error (RMSE) was compared between various selected areas using a one-way repeated measures analysis of variance, followed by a Bonferroni post-hoc test.

Results The RMSE of the hemipelvis was 0.25 ± 0.05 mm. The RMSE significantly decreased from the medial surface (0.28 ± 0.06mm), to the lateral surface (0.23 ± 0.06mm), to the DSA (0.04 ± 0.02mm) (p < 0.001).

Conclusion The 3D-printed replicas were adequate in serving as a template for the pre-contouring of bone plates in fracture repair of pelvic fractures, particularly those that demand accurate reduction such as acetabular fractures.

Keywords

3D printing - pelvis - pre-contouring of bone plates - surface contour - dogs

Authors' Contributions

L.M., J.J, and K.S.Y. conceptualized and designed the study. M.L. and K.S.Y. contributed to data acquisition, data analysis, and interpretation. All the authors drafted/revised and approved the submitted manuscript and are accountable for relevant content.




Publication History

Received: 24 November 2021

Accepted: 06 July 2022

Article published online:
23 September 2022

© 2022. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 DeCamp CE. Fractures of the pelvis. In: Tobias KM, Johnston SA, eds. Veterinary Surgery: Small Animal. 1st ed. Vol. 1. St. Louis: Saunders, Elsevier Inc.; 2012: 801-815
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Intarapanich NP, McCobb EC, Reisman RW, Rozanski EA, Intarapanich PP. Characterization and comparison of injuries caused by accidental and non-accidental blunt force trauma in dogs and cats. J Forensic Sci 2016; 61 (04) 993-999
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Draffan D, Clements D, Farrell M, Heller J, Bennett D, Carmichael S. The role of computed tomography in the classification and management of pelvic fractures. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2009; 22 (03) 190-197
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Stieger-Vanegas SM, Senthirajah SK, Nemanic S, Baltzer W, Warnock J, Bobe G. Evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of four-view radiography and conventional computed tomography analysing sacral and pelvic fractures in dogs. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2015; 28 (03) 155-163
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Brown GA, Milner B, Firoozbakhsh K. Application of computer-generated stereolithography and interpositioning template in acetabular fractures: a report of eight cases. J Orthop Trauma 2002; 16 (05) 347-352
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Chana-Rodríguez F, Mañanes RP, Rojo-Manaute J, Gil P, Martínez-Gómiz JM, Vaquero-Martín J. 3D surgical printing and pre contoured plates for acetabular fractures. Injury 2016; 47 (11) 2507-2511
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Hurson C, Tansey A, O'Donnchadha B, Nicholson P, Rice J, McElwain J. Rapid prototyping in the assessment, classification and preoperative planning of acetabular fractures. Injury 2007; 38 (10) 1158-1162
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Lam G, Kim S-Y. Three-dimensional computer-assisted surgical planning and use of three-dimensional printing in the repair of a complex articular femoral fracture in a dog. VCOT Open 2018; 01 (01) e12-e8
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Upex P, Jouffroy P, Riouallon G. Application of 3D printing for treating fractures of both columns of the acetabulum: benefit of pre-contouring plates on the mirrored healthy pelvis. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2017; 103 (03) 331-334
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Choi JY, Choi JH, Kim NK. et al. Analysis of errors in medical rapid prototyping models. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2002; 31 (01) 23-32
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Cone JA, Martin TM, Marcellin-Little DJ, Harrysson OLA, Griffith EH. Accuracy and repeatability of long-bone replicas of small animals fabricated by use of low-end and high-end commercial three-dimensional printers. Am J Vet Res 2017; 78 (08) 900-905
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Fitzwater KL, Marcellin-Little DJ, Harrysson OL, Osborne JA, Poindexter EC. Evaluation of the effect of computed tomography scan protocols and freeform fabrication methods on bone biomodel accuracy. Am J Vet Res 2011; 72 (09) 1178-1185
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Ibrahim D, Broilo TL, Heitz C. et al. Dimensional error of selective laser sintering, three-dimensional printing and PolyJet models in the reproduction of mandibular anatomy. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2009; 37 (03) 167-173
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Salmi M, Paloheimo K-S, Tuomi J, Wolff J, Mäkitie A. Accuracy of medical models made by additive manufacturing (rapid manufacturing). J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2013; 41 (07) 603-609
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Llinas A, McKellop HA, Marshall GJ, Sharpe F, Kirchen M, Sarmiento A. Healing and remodeling of articular incongruities in a rabbit fracture model. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1993; 75 (10) 1508-1523
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Frisbie DD, Cross MW, McIlwraith CW. A comparative study of articular cartilage thickness in the stifle of animal species used in human pre-clinical studies compared to articular cartilage thickness in the human knee. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2006; 19 (03) 142-146
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Oxley B. Bilateral shoulder arthrodesis in a Pekinese using three-dimensional printed patient-specific osteotomy and reduction guides. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2017; 30 (03) 230-236
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Oxley B. A 3-dimensional-printed patient-specific guide system for minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis of a comminuted mid-diaphyseal humeral fracture in a cat. Vet Surg 2018; 47 (03) 445-453
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Winer JN, Verstraete FJM, Cissell DD, Lucero S, Athanasiou KA, Arzi B. The application of 3-dimensional printing for preoperative planning in oral and maxillofacial surgery in dogs and cats. Vet Surg 2017; 46 (07) 942-951
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Fahrni S, Campana L, Dominguez A. et al. CT-scan vs. 3D surface scanning of a skull: first considerations regarding reproducibility issues. Forensic Sci Res 2017; 2 (02) 93-99
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Colman KL, de Boer HH, Dobbe JGG. et al. Virtual forensic anthropology: the accuracy of osteometric analysis of 3D bone models derived from clinical computed tomography (CT) scans. Forensic Sci Int 2019; 304: 109963
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 MDimitrios Mitsouras PCL. 3D printing technologies. In: Rybicki FJ, Grant GT, eds. 3D Printing in Medicine: A Practical Guide for Medical Professionals. Vol. 1. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing AG; 2017: 5-23
    Google Scholar
  • 23 Hada T, Kanazawa M, Iwaki M. et al. Effect of printing direction on the accuracy of 3D-printed dentures using stereolithography technology. Materials (Basel) 2020; 13 (15) 3405
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar