This preprint is under consideration at 3D Printing in Medicine. A preprint is a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Case report
Evan Fang
University of Hong Kong Faculty of Engineering
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0034-0753
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background: Patients who undergo decompressive craniectomy (DC) are often fitted with a protective helmet that protects the craniectomy site from injury during rehabilitation. However, conventional “one-size-fits-all” helmets may not be feasible for certain craniectomy defects. We describe the production and use of a custom 3D-printed helmet for a DC patient where a conventional helmet was not feasible due to the craniectomy defect configuration.
Case presentation: A 65-year-old male with ethmoid sinonasal carcinoma underwent cranionasal resection and DC with free vastus lateralis flap reconstruction to treat cerebrospinal fluid leakage. He required an external helmet to protect the craniectomy site, however, the rim of a conventional helmet compressed the craniectomy site, and the straps compressed the vascular pedicle of the muscle flap. Computed topography (CT) scans of the patient’s cranium were imported into 3D modelling software and used to fabricate a patient-specific, strapless helmet using fused deposition modelling (FDM). The final helmet fit the patient perfectly and circumvented the compression issues, while also providing better cosmesis than the conventional helmet. Four months postoperatively, the helmet remains intact and in use.
Conclusions: 3D printing can be used to produce low-volume, patient-specific external devices for rehabilitation where standardized adjuncts not optimal. Once initial start-up costs and training are overcome, these devices can be produced by surgeons themselves to meet a wide range of clinical needs.
Keywords
3D printing, skull defect, protective helmet, decompressive craniectomy
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Under Review
Version (no preprint)
Posted 18 Dec, 2020
This version was not preprinted
Version 1
Posted 18 Dec, 2020
Community comments: 1
Editorial decision: Minor revision
On 21 Aug, 2021
Review #2 received
Received 22 Jan, 2021
Review #1 received
Received 22 Jan, 2021
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 30 Dec, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 30 Dec, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 30 Dec, 2020
Editor assigned
On 14 Dec, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 14 Dec, 2020
Editor invited
On 14 Dec, 2020
First submitted
On 09 Dec, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Surgery
Learn more about our company.
This preprint is under consideration at 3D Printing in Medicine. A preprint is a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Case report
Evan Fang
University of Hong Kong Faculty of Engineering
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0034-0753
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Under Review
Version (no preprint)
Posted 18 Dec, 2020
This version was not preprinted
Version 1
Posted 18 Dec, 2020
Community comments: 1
Editorial decision: Minor revision
On 21 Aug, 2021
Review #2 received
Received 22 Jan, 2021
Review #1 received
Received 22 Jan, 2021
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 30 Dec, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 30 Dec, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 30 Dec, 2020
Editor assigned
On 14 Dec, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 14 Dec, 2020
Editor invited
On 14 Dec, 2020
First submitted
On 09 Dec, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Surgery
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background: Patients who undergo decompressive craniectomy (DC) are often fitted with a protective helmet that protects the craniectomy site from injury during rehabilitation. However, conventional “one-size-fits-all” helmets may not be feasible for certain craniectomy defects. We describe the production and use of a custom 3D-printed helmet for a DC patient where a conventional helmet was not feasible due to the craniectomy defect configuration.
Case presentation: A 65-year-old male with ethmoid sinonasal carcinoma underwent cranionasal resection and DC with free vastus lateralis flap reconstruction to treat cerebrospinal fluid leakage. He required an external helmet to protect the craniectomy site, however, the rim of a conventional helmet compressed the craniectomy site, and the straps compressed the vascular pedicle of the muscle flap. Computed topography (CT) scans of the patient’s cranium were imported into 3D modelling software and used to fabricate a patient-specific, strapless helmet using fused deposition modelling (FDM). The final helmet fit the patient perfectly and circumvented the compression issues, while also providing better cosmesis than the conventional helmet. Four months postoperatively, the helmet remains intact and in use.
Conclusions: 3D printing can be used to produce low-volume, patient-specific external devices for rehabilitation where standardized adjuncts not optimal. Once initial start-up costs and training are overcome, these devices can be produced by surgeons themselves to meet a wide range of clinical needs.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10
Loading...