4.2 Article

Three-Dimensional Modeling of the Temporal Bone for Surgical Training

期刊

OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY
卷 31, 期 2, 页码 328-334

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e3181c0e655

关键词

Rapid prototyping; Simulation; Stereolithography; Surgery; Temporal bone

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: The anatomy of the temporal bone (TB) can only be mastered by repeated surgical and anatomic dissections, and surgical teaching initiative had a major effect on outcomes. The aim of this study was to investigate the validity of an artificial TB model devoted to surgical training and education. Materials and Methods: A helical computed tomographic (CT) scan was used to acquire high-resolution data of cadaveric TB. Digital imaging and communications in medicine (DICOM) data were converted into. stl files after data processing. Cadaveric TBs were prototyped using stereolithography. The validation of the prototype needed several steps. First of all, we have studied on CT scan the positional relationship between the facial nerve and other structures of the cadaveric TBs and prototyped bones. Otoendoscopy of the middle ear and the internal acoustic canal and visualization of anatomic landmarks during TB drilling of the cadaveric TBs and prototyped bones were also performed. Results: Seven normal CT scans of cadaveric TB were selected to make prototyped bone using stereolithography. Measurements of volume and distance showed no significant difference between prototypes and cadaver TBs. Classic mastoid surgical procedures were performed in the Anatomy Department: exposing sigmoid sinus, facial nerve, labyrinth, dura mater, jugular bulb, and internal carotid artery. Two simulations of implantable middle ear prosthesis were made successfully. Conclusion: These prototypes made using stereolithography seem to be a good anatomic model for surgical training. This model could also be interesting for surgical planning in congenital ear anomalies before middle ear prosthesis implantation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据