A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

The Value of Using Patient-Specific 3D-Printed Anatomical Models in Surgical Planning for Patients With Complex Multifibroid Uteri. | LitMetric

The Value of Using Patient-Specific 3D-Printed Anatomical Models in Surgical Planning for Patients With Complex Multifibroid Uteri.

J Obstet Gynaecol Can

Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Ottawa, ON; University of Ottawa, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ottawa, ON; The Ottawa Hospital, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Newborn Care, Ottawa, ON. Electronic address:

Published: June 2024

Objectives: To compare surgeon responses regarding their surgical plan before and after receiving a patient-specific three-dimensional (3D)-printed model of a patient's multifibroid uterus created from their magnetic resonance imaging.

Methods: 3D-printed models were derived from standard-of-care pelvic magnetic resonance images of patients scheduled for surgical intervention for multifibroid uterus. Relevant anatomical structures were printed using a combination of transparent and opaque resin types. 3D models were used for 7 surgical cases (5 myomectomies, 2 hysterectomies). A staff surgeon and 1 or 2 surgical fellow(s) were present for each case. Surgeons completed a questionnaire before and after receiving the model documenting surgical approach, perceived difficulty, and confidence in surgical plan. A postoperative questionnaire was used to assess surgeon experience using 3D models.

Results: Two staff surgeons and 3 clinical fellows participated in this study. A total of 15 surgeon responses were collected across the 7 cases. After viewing the models, an increase in perceived surgical difficulty and confidence in surgical plan was reported in 12/15 and 7/15 responses, respectively. Anticipated surgical time had a mean ± SD absolute change of 44.0 ± 47.9 minutes and anticipated blood loss had an absolute change of 100 ± 103.5 cc. 2 of 15 responses report a change in pre-surgical approach. Intra-operative model reference was reported to change the dissection route in 8/15 surgeon responses. On average, surgeons rated their experience using 3D models 8.6/10 for pre-surgical planning and 8.1/10 for intra-operative reference.

Conclusions: Patient-specific 3D anatomical models may be a useful tool to increase a surgeon's understanding of complex gynaecologic anatomy and to improve their surgical plan. Future work is needed to evaluate the impact of 3D models on surgical outcomes in gynaecology.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jogc.2024.102435DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

surgical plan
16
surgical
12
models surgical
12
surgeon responses
12
anatomical models
8
multifibroid uterus
8
magnetic resonance
8
difficulty confidence
8
confidence surgical
8
absolute change
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!