4.4 Article

Application of 3D Printing for Patient-Specific Silicone Stents: 1-Year Follow-Up on 2 Patients

Journal

RESPIRATION
Volume 96, Issue 5, Pages 488-494

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000489669

Keywords

Airway stent; Bronchoscopy; 3D printing

Funding

  1. NIH-NCAI grant [1U54HL119810-03]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Managing complex benign airway disease is a major challenge in interventional pulmonology. Airway stent placement can result in complications due to a variety of factors, including poor fit of the stent in the airway. We report the 1-year outcome of 2 patients with airway disease caused by granulomatosis with polyangiitis (Wegener's) affecting the left main bronchus and secondary carina. These patients had not responded to systemic therapy or standard bronchoscopic techniques and had complications with commercially available airway stents. We describe a first-in-human, clinical experience to address these issues. Using computed tomography (CT) imaging and 3D printing technology, we generated and implanted patient-specific silicone airway stents to address airway disease. 3D patient-specific stent prescription was created using a CT scan of the patient's chest and a proprietary software package originally developed for orthopedic surgical planning. Silicone stents were manufactured and implanted. Observation for > 1 year after implantation compared to the 6 months prior to patient-specific stent implant were compared for the number, clinically required stent changes, procedure time, and general clinical improvement per usual standard of care after airway stenting. Patients showed improved durability, a shorter procedure time, and improvement of patient-reported symptoms leading to a reduced need for stent changes and modifications. The use of 3D printing technology to make patient-specific silicone stents is feasible with early clinical proof of concept noting a durable improvement over 1 year of follow-up.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available