The patient underwent revision left hip arthroplasty using a custom acetabular component. A 3-D model available at time of surgery was used to aid implant placement.
Case 6
A 23-year-old man with multiple hereditary exostoses presented to our clinic with a painful mass in the left calf. Plain radiographs showed extensive osteochondromatosis involving the left proximal tibiofibular joint (Figure 6). The exostosis extended posteromedially, displacing the arterial trifurcation. MRI showed a small cartilage cap without evidence of malignant transformation.
CT angiogram allowed the vasculature to be modeled along with the deformity. A 3-D model was fabricated. The model included the entire proximal tibiofibular joint, as well as the anterior tibial, peroneal, and posterior tibial arteries. Cautious intralesional resection was recommended because of the proximity to all 3 vessels.
The patient underwent tumor resection through a longitudinal posterior approach. The interval between the medial and lateral heads of the gastrocnemius muscles was developed to expose the underlying soleus muscle. The soleus was split longitudinally from its hiatus to the inferior portion of the exostosis. This allowed for identification of the trifurcation and the tibial nerve, which were protected. Osteotomes were used to resect the mass at its base, the edges were carefully trimmed, and bone wax was placed over the defect. Anterior and lateral to this mass was another large mass (under the soleus muscle), which was also transected using an osteotome. The gastrocnemius and soleus muscles were then reflected off the fibula in order to remove 2 other exostoses, beneath the neck and head of the fibula.
Case 7
A 71-year-old man with a history of idiopathic lymphedema and peripheral neuropathy presented to our clinic with a left cavovarus foot deformity and a history of recurrent neuropathic foot ulcers (Figure 7). Physical examination revealed a callus over the lateral aspect of the base of the fifth metatarsal. Preoperative radiograph showed evidence of prior triple arthrodesis with a cavovarus foot deformity. CT scan was used to create a 3-D model of the foot. The model was then used to identify an appropriate location for lateral midtarsal and calcaneal closing-wedge osteotomies.
The patient underwent midfoot and hindfoot surgical correction. At surgery, the lateral closing-wedge osteotomies were performed according to the preoperative model. Radiographs 1 year after surgery showed correction of the forefoot varus.
Discussion
Three-dimensional printing for medical applications of anatomical modeling is not a new concept.1,3,4 Its use has been reported for a variety of applications in orthopedic surgery, including the printing of porous and metallic surfaces5 and bone-tissue engineering.6-9 Rapid prototyping for medical application was first reported in 1990 when a CT-based model was used to create a cranial bone.10 Reports of using the technique are becoming more widespread, particularly in the dental and maxillofacial literature, which includes reports on a variety of applications, including patient-specific drill guides, splints, and implants.11-14 The ability to perform mock surgery in advance of an actual procedure provides an invaluable opportunity to anticipate potential intraoperative problems, reduce operative time, and improve the accuracy of reconstruction.
Office-based rapid prototyping that uses an in-house 3-D printer is a novel application of this technology. It allows for creation of a patient-specific model for preoperative planning purposes. We are unaware of any other reports demonstrating the breadth and utility of office-based rapid prototyping in orthopedic surgery. For general reference, a printer similar to ours requires an initial investment of $52,000 to $56,000. This cost generally covers the printer, printer base cabinet, installation, training, and printer software (different from the 3-D modeling software), plus a 1-year warranty. A service agreement costs about $4000 annually. Printer and model supply expenses depend on the material used for the model (eg, ABS [acrylonitrile butadiene styrene]) and on the size and complexity of the 3-D models created. Average time to generate an appropriately formatted 3-D printing file is about 1 hour, though times can vary largely, according to amount of metal artifact subtraction necessary and the experience of the software user. For the rare, extremely complex deformities that require a significant amount of metal artifact subtraction, file preparation times can exceed 3 or 4 hours. We think these preparation times will decrease as communication between radiology file export format and modeling software ultimately allows for metal artifact subtraction images to function within the modeling software environment. Once an appropriately formatted file has been created, typical printing times vary according to the size of the to-be-modeled bone. For a hemipelvis, printing time is 30 to 40 hours; printing that is started on a Friday afternoon will be complete by Monday morning.