Advertisement

Journal of Digital Imaging

, Volume 29, Issue 1, pp 14–21 | Cite as

3D Printing of CT Dataset: Validation of an Open Source and Consumer-Available Workflow

  • Chandra BortolottoEmail author
  • Esmeralda Eshja
  • Caterina Peroni
  • Matteo A. Orlandi
  • Nicola Bizzotto
  • Paolo Poggi
Article

Abstract

The broad availability of cheap three-dimensional (3D) printing equipment has raised the need for a thorough analysis on its effects on clinical accuracy. Our aim is to determine whether the accuracy of 3D printing process is affected by the use of a low-budget workflow based on open source software and consumer’s commercially available 3D printers. A group of test objects was scanned with a 64-slice computed tomography (CT) in order to build their 3D copies. CT datasets were elaborated using a software chain based on three free and open source software. Objects were printed out with a commercially available 3D printer. Both the 3D copies and the test objects were measured using a digital professional caliper. Overall, the objects’ mean absolute difference between test objects and 3D copies is 0.23 mm and the mean relative difference amounts to 0.55 %. Our results demonstrate that the accuracy of 3D printing process remains high despite the use of a low-budget workflow.

Keywords

Multidetector computed tomography Computer-aided design Printing Imaging three-dimensional Dimensional measurement accuracy 

Notes

Acknowledgments

None

Conflicts of Interest

None for all authors

Ethics Statement

All human and animal studies have been approved and performed in accordance with ethical standards, and informed consent was obtained.

Supplementary material

Vid. 1

Video tutorial Osirix (MOV 6635 kb)

Vid. 2

Video tutorial MeshLab (MOV 8493 kb)

Vid. 3

Video tutorial Cura (MOV 9662 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Rengier F, Mehndiratta A, von Tengg-Kobligk H, Zechmann CM, Unterhinninghofen R, Kauczor HU, Giesel FL: 3D printing based on imaging data: review of medical applications. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 5(4):335–341, 2010CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bizzotto N, Sandri A, Regis D, Romani D, Tami I, Magnan B: Three-dimensional printing of bone fractures: a new tangible realistic way for preoperative planning and education. Surg Innov, 2014. doi: 10.1177/1553350614547773 Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tam MD, Laycock SD, Brown JR, Jakeways M: 3D printing of an aortic aneurysm to facilitate decision making and device selection for endovascular aneurysm repair in complex neck anatomy. J Endovasc Ther 20(6):863–867, 2013CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Spottiswoode BS, van den Heever DJ, Chang Y, Engelhardt S, Du Plessis S, Nicolls F, Hartzenberg HB, Gretschel A: Preoperative three-dimensional model creation of magnetic resonance brain images as a tool to assist neurosurgical planning. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg 91(3):162–169, 2013CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Esses SJ, Berman P, Bloom AI, Sosna J: Clinical applications of physical 3D models derived from MDCT data and created by rapid prototyping. AJR Am J Roentgenol 196(6):W683–W688, 2011CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Smet MH, Marchal GJ, Baert AL, Van Hoe L, Van Cleynenbreugel J, Daniels H, Molenaers G, Moens P, Fabry G: Three-dimensional imaging of acetabular dysplasia: diagnostic value and impact on surgical type classification. Eur J Radiol 34(1):26–31, 2000CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ibrahim D, Broilo TL, Heitz C, de Oliveira MG, de Oliveira HW, Nobre SM, Dos Santos Filho JH, Silva DN: Dimensional error of selective laser sintering, three-dimensional printing and PolyJet models in the reproduction of mandibular anatomy. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 37(3):167–173, 2009CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Asaumi J, Kawai N, Honda Y, Shigehara H, Wakasa T, Kishi K: Comparison of three-dimensional computed tomography with rapid prototype models in the management of coronoid hyperplasia. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 30:330–335, 2001CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fourie Z, Damstra J, Schepers RH, Gerrits PO, Ren Y: Segmentation process significantly influences the accuracy of 3D surface models derived from cone beam computed tomography. Eur J Radiol 81(4):e524–e530, 2012CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Silva DN, Gerhardt de Oliveira M, Meurer E, Meurer MI, Lopes da Silva JV, Santa-Bárbara A: Dimensional error in selective laser sintering and 3D-printing of models for craniomaxillary anatomy reconstruction. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 36(8):443–449, 2008CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Salmi M, Paloheimo KS, Tuomi J, Wolff J, Mäkitie A: Accuracy of medical models made by additive manufacturing (rapid manufacturing). J Craniomaxillofac Surg 41(7):603–609, 2013CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Murugesan K, Anandapandian PA, Sharma SK, Vasantha Kumar M: Comparative evaluation of dimension and surface detail accuracy of models produced by three different rapid prototype techniques. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 12(1):16–20, 2012PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Frühwald J, Schicho KA, Figl M, Benesch T, Watzinger F, Kainberger F: Accuracy of craniofacial measurements: computed tomography and three-dimensional computed tomography compared with stereolithographic models. J Craniofac Surg 19(1):22–26, 2008PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    El-Katatny I, Masood SH, Morsi YS: Error analysis of FDM fabricated medical replicas. Rapid Prototyp J 16:36e43, 2010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Huotilainen E, Jaanimets R, Valášek J, Marcián P, Salmi M, Tuomi J, Mäkitie A, Wolff J: Inaccuracies in additive manufactured medical skull models caused by the DICOM to STL conversion process. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 42(5):e259–e265, 2014CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fasel JH, Beinemann J, Schaller K, Gailloud P: A critical inventory of preoperative skull replicas. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 95(6):401–404, 2013PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Imaging Informatics in Medicine 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Radiology Department, Ospedale Maggiore di LodiLodiItaly
  2. 2.Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Polo Chirurgico ConfortiniVeronaItaly

Personalised recommendations