MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Three-Dimensional Printing of Perforator Vascular Anatomy

2013· article· en· W2328950272 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePlastic & Reconstructive Surgery · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnatomy and Medical Technology
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCadaverMedicineDissection (medical)Thoracodorsal arteryAnatomyMammary arteryComputed tomographicBiomedical engineeringSurgeryArteryFree flapComputed tomography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sir: The use of three-dimensional printing has increased in recent years with the advent of commercially available three-dimensional printers and lower costs. Computed tomographic data can be obtained rapidly and incorporated into three-dimensional reconstructions visualized in two dimensions. This information can be used to produce a physical object using progressive layering of different polymers or materials with a three-dimensional printer. Production of three-dimensional models allows improved visualization and manipulation of anatomical structures compared with two-dimensional representations. They can be used for surgical planning, implant design, and education.1 Three-dimensional models have also been used for training on patient-specific models to simulate surgical procedures to help understand difficult anatomy, predict complications, and potentially reduce operating time.1–41–41–41–4 We produced a three-dimensional model to facilitate understanding of the regional anatomy of the internal mammary artery. We chose the internal mammary artery perforator system, as its relationship to surrounding ribs is important in the dissection and identification of the dominant perforator while raising the internal mammary artery perforator flap. To create a three-dimensional model of the dominant internal mammary artery perforator, a fresh cadaver was injected with the modified lead oxide technique described previously.5 The cadaver was obtained through the Dalhousie University Donor Program. Plain films and computed tomographic images of the cadaver were obtained and the data were analyzed using Materialise’s Interactive Medical Image Control System program (Materialise, Leuven, Belgium). Using the program, three-dimensional images of the dominant internal mammary artery perforator and surrounding structures were created (Fig. 1).Fig. 1: Three-dimensional reconstructions of the left bony thorax, internal mammary artery, and dominant left internal mammary artery perforator and lateral thoracic artery from cadaveric computed tomographic data using Materialise’s Interactive Medical Imaging Control System. (Left) Anterior-posterior, (center) oblique, and (right) posterior-anterior views (*, second internal mammary artery perforator; •, second rib; , lateral thoracic artery).The reconstruction was printed in three dimensions using a composite powder printing process on a ProJet x60 series printer with a Z-bond 90 infiltrant (3D Systems, Rock Hill, S.C.). This produces a three-dimensional object by successively laying down the infiltrant to build the model slice by slice based on the reconstruction. We report the first use of three-dimensional printing to produce vascular perforator anatomy. The dominant internal mammary artery perforator can be seen branching off of the internal mammary artery, through the second intercostal space and anastomosing with the lateral thoracic artery (Fig. 2).Fig. 2: Anteroposterior (left) and oblique (right) views of a three-dimensional model of the left bony thorax, internal mammary artery, and internal mammary artery perforator (*, second internal mammary artery perforator; •, second rib; , lateral thoracic artery). The lateral thoracic artery was based on cadaveric data and printed using a ProJet x60 series printer with a Z-bond 90 infiltrant (3D Systems, Rock Hill, S.C.).The use of three-dimensional printing to produce physical objects is the next step from three-dimensional reconstructions visualized on two-dimensional screens. It allows rapid manipulation and understanding of an individual’s anatomy by physically holding the object and being able to visualize it in multiple planes. This can be useful for teaching learners, and can be used as a tool to better explain the proposed surgery to patients using their own anatomy. One limitation of the process is the cost associated with production of the model, which can be anywhere from $400 to $1200. Also, due to the minuteness of perforator vessels, some smaller vessels do not endure the printing process due to the resolution limitations of the three-dimensional printer. This can be ameliorated with a larger model, albeit at a higher cost. Also, the materials used to make certain models are delicate, and rough handling can cause perforator branches to crack. However, postprinting processing with materials such as wax can create a durable model that can be used in clinics and teaching sessions. DISCLOSURE The authors have no financial interest in any of the products or devices mentioned in this article. Joshua A. Gillis, B.Sc., M.D. Steven F. Morris, M.D., M.Sc. Division of Plastic Surgery Dalhousie University Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.585
Threshold uncertainty score0.955

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.182 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it