How to Create and 3D Print a Model of the Skull and Orbit for Craniomaxillofacial Surgeons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three-dimensional (3D) anatomical models are used in many ways in cranio-maxillo-facial (CMF) surgery, including being used to press-fit plates, mold splints, and for student teaching. Their use has many advantages, including the possibility of lowering operative time and allowing for more precise reconstructions with personalized plates, meshes, and splints. This can now be done in-house to speed up model availability for trauma surgery as well. Three-dimensional printers and software are quickly evolving—printers now are easily accessible, and the models are inexpensive to print. However, for a surgeon with no IT training, 3D printing even a simple anatomic model may be a challenge. The purpose of this article is to offer simple, step-by-step video tutorials demonstrating the process of extracting a CMF model from a patient CT scan, doing basic manipulation to the model, and then printing it in-house with a prosumer grade 3D printer. It is our hope that this user-friendly article will allow more surgeons and scientists to use 3D printing and its advantages.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".