See the published version of this preprint at 3D Printing in Medicine.
This is a preprint, 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
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
Technical Note
Erasmo Barros da Silva Jr
Instituto de Neurologia de Curitiba
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0454-3825
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background
Different methods of cranioplasty for the reconstruction of bony skull defects exist. In the absence of the autologous bone flap, a customised manufactured implant may be the optimal choice, but this implant has several limitations regarding its technical standardisation and better cost-effectiveness.
Methods
This study presents a series of 11 consecutive patients who had undergone cranioplasty with customised three-dimensional (3D) template moulds for polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) implants manufactured after 3D modelling on a specific workstation. The virtual images were transformed into a two-piece physical model using a 3D printer for the biomaterials. PMMA implant was produced intraoperatively with the custom mould. Cosmetic results were analysed by comparing pre- and postoperative 3D computed tomography (CT) images and asking if the patient was satisfied with the result.
Results
The average total time for planning and production of customised mould was 10 days. The 11 patients were satisfied with the result, and CT images presented harmonious symmetry when comparing pre- and postoperative scans. Cases of postoperative infection, bleeding, or reoperation in this series were not observed.
Conclusion
Cranioplasty with high-technology customised 3D moulds for PMMA implants can allow for an aesthetic reconstruction with a fast and cost-effective manufacturing process and possibly with low complication rates.
Keywords
3D printing, cranioplasty, customised implant, polymethylmethacrylate, reconstructive surgery, three-dimensional template
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
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: Published
View the published article at 3D Printing in Medicine.
Version 1
Posted 02 Nov, 2020
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 13 Nov, 2020
Review #3 received
Received 12 Nov, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 09 Nov, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 08 Nov, 2020
Review #4 received
Received 03 Nov, 2020
Reviewer #4 agreed
On 02 Nov, 2020
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 30 Oct, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 30 Oct, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 29 Oct, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 29 Oct, 2020
Editor assigned
On 29 Oct, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 28 Oct, 2020
Editor invited
On 28 Oct, 2020
First submitted
On 27 Oct, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Learn more about our company.
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
See the published version of this preprint at 3D Printing in Medicine.
This is a preprint, 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
Technical Note
Erasmo Barros da Silva Jr
Instituto de Neurologia de Curitiba
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0454-3825
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: Published
View the published article at 3D Printing in Medicine.
Version 1
Posted 02 Nov, 2020
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 13 Nov, 2020
Review #3 received
Received 12 Nov, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 09 Nov, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 08 Nov, 2020
Review #4 received
Received 03 Nov, 2020
Reviewer #4 agreed
On 02 Nov, 2020
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 30 Oct, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 30 Oct, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 29 Oct, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 29 Oct, 2020
Editor assigned
On 29 Oct, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 28 Oct, 2020
Editor invited
On 28 Oct, 2020
First submitted
On 27 Oct, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
View the published article at 3D Printing in Medicine.
Background
Different methods of cranioplasty for the reconstruction of bony skull defects exist. In the absence of the autologous bone flap, a customised manufactured implant may be the optimal choice, but this implant has several limitations regarding its technical standardisation and better cost-effectiveness.
Methods
This study presents a series of 11 consecutive patients who had undergone cranioplasty with customised three-dimensional (3D) template moulds for polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) implants manufactured after 3D modelling on a specific workstation. The virtual images were transformed into a two-piece physical model using a 3D printer for the biomaterials. PMMA implant was produced intraoperatively with the custom mould. Cosmetic results were analysed by comparing pre- and postoperative 3D computed tomography (CT) images and asking if the patient was satisfied with the result.
Results
The average total time for planning and production of customised mould was 10 days. The 11 patients were satisfied with the result, and CT images presented harmonious symmetry when comparing pre- and postoperative scans. Cases of postoperative infection, bleeding, or reoperation in this series were not observed.
Conclusion
Cranioplasty with high-technology customised 3D moulds for PMMA implants can allow for an aesthetic reconstruction with a fast and cost-effective manufacturing process and possibly with low complication rates.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Loading...