A New Methodology for Designing a Skull Implant
Annual Research & Review in Biology,
Cranioplasty is a surgery used to repair a bone defect in the skull caused by an injury. It involves lifting the scalp and restoring the contour of the skull with an implant usually manufactured by additive manufacturing. The cranial implant is a sensitive topic; thus, it must be manufactured to the highest standards. Medical implants are growing significantly due to industrial digitalization and the rapid development of industrial software. With the help of computed Tomography (CT) equipment, a spatial, rotating model of the patient's current state can be obtained quickly, even in minutes where the replacement part of the deficiency can be perfectly designed. Although this requires considerable routine, computational capacity, and time, but taking advantage of the latest software presented in our manuscript, the development time of the implant can be up to 50 times shorter with significant improvements in suitability and adaptability. Subsequently, we can produce more accurate implants with more accessible and faster manufacturing with our developed method. The development steps and methods of designing an implant are described in our article.
- computed tomography
- computer-aided design
How to Cite
Hieu LC, et al. A cheap technical solution for cranioplasty treatments, Technol. Heal. Care. 2004;12(3):281–292.
De La Peña A, De La Peña-Brambila J, Pérez-De La Torre J, Ochoa M, Gallardo GJ. Low-cost customized cranioplasty using a 3D digital printing model: A case report. 3D Print. Med. 2018;4:1.
Sena K, Piyasin S. Determination of Average Contour of Thais Skulls for Design of Implants, Am. J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 2008;1(3):168–173.
Eufinger H, Wehmöller M, Harders A, Heuser L. Prefabricated prostheses for the reconstruction of skull defects, Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 1995; 24(1)Part 2:104–110.
Chrzan R, Urbanik A, Karbowski K, Moskała M, Polak J, Pyrich M. Cranioplasty prosthesis manufacturing based on reverse engineering technology. Med. Sci. Monit. 2012;18(1):1–6.
Salyer KE, Taylor DP. Bone grafts in craniofacial surgery. Clin. Plast. Surg. 1987;14(1):27–35.
de S. Leão R, et al. Complications with PMMA compared with other materials used in cranioplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Braz. Oral Res. 2018;32: e31.
D'Urso F, Effeney PS, Earwaker DJ, Barker WJ, Redmond TM, Thompson MJ, Tomlinson RG. Custom cranioplasty using stereolithography and acrylic. British Journal of Plastic Surgery. Br. J. Plast. Surg. 2000;53(3):200-204.
Sailer HF, Haers PE, Zollikofer CPE, Warnke T, Carls FR, Stucki P. The value of stereolithographic models for preoperative diagnosis of craniofacial deformities and planning of surgical corrections. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 1998;27(5):327–333.
Bill JS, et al. Stereolithography in oral and maxillofacial operation planning. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 1995;24(1)Part 2:98–103.
Jardini AL, et al. Cranial reconstruction: 3D biomodel and custom-built implant created using additive manufacturing. J. Cranio-Maxillofacial Surg. 2014;42(8):1877– 1884.
Lin YC, Cheng CY, Cheng YW, Shih CT. Skull repair using active contour models Procedia Manuf. 2017;11:2164–2169.
Mustra M, Delac K, Grgic M. Overview of the DICOM standard. Proc. Elmar - Int. Symp. Electron. Mar. 2008;1: 39–44.
Ficzere P, Bogya P, Horváth E, Lovas L. Simplified cad model of human metacarpal for implantation péter ficzere–péter bogya–eszter horváth–lászló lovas. 2018; 8(2):5–12.
Winder J, Bibb R. Medical rapid prototyping technologies: State of the art and current limitations for application in oral and maxillofacial surgery. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 2005;63(7):1006–1015.
Gyori M, Ficzere P. Increasing role of sections caused by 3D modelling. Period. Polytech. Transp. Eng. 2016;44(3):164–171.
Gyori M, Ficzere P. Use of sections in the engineering practice. Period. Polytech. Transp. Eng. 2017;45(1):21–24.
Abstract View: 127 times
PDF Download: 38 times