Open Access
Piyush D. Ukey,
Narendra Kumar,
Ravi Pratap Singh,
- Research Scholar Department of Industrial & Production Engineering, Dr. B R Ambedkar NIT Jalandhar Punjab
- Assistant Professor Department of Industrial & Production Engineering, Dr. B R Ambedkar NIT Jalandhar Punjab
- Assistant Professor Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Kurukshetra Haryana
Abstract
Temporal bone (Ear Bone) has the most complex anatomical structure in body. ENT Surgeons need lot of practice before doing any surgery. Dissecting cadaver temporal bone is best teaching aid available with ENT surgeons, but have several constrains like legal, ethical, religious ground etc., restricts the hands-on dissection training. Availability of cadaver temporal bone is also very limited; it also houses many infectious agents and viruses. With recent advancement in 3D printing, it is possible to fabricate accurate 3D printed temporal bone with all the intricate anatomical details. Internal and external anatomical structures and landmarks can be easily identified in the 3D printed temporal bone. 3D printed temporal bone is validated by a group of ENT surgeons comprises of post graduate students and senior surgeons (No of participants = 30). 3D printed temporal bone is validated based on usefulness of the model for surgical simulation and tasked based usefulness (surgeries that can be practiced). Results shows that the 3D printed temporal bone model is highly accepted by the validating group for the hands-on surgical simulation and practice and can be used as substitute of cadaveric temporal bone for enhancing surgical skills of ENT surgeons.
Keywords: 3D Printed Temporal Bone, Artificial Temporal Bone, Surgical Training Model, Surgical Simulation, Dissection Training Mode.
References
[1] D. V. K. Irugu, A. C. Singh, K. Sikka, J. Bhinyaram, and S. C. Sharma, “Establishing a Temporal Bone Laboratory in Teaching Institutes to Train Future Otorhinolaryngologists and Fundamentals of Temporal Bone Laboratory: Considerations and Requirements,” Indian J. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg., pp. 1–5, 2016, doi: 10.1007/s12070-015-0962-0. [2] S. Naik, M. Naik, and N. Bains, “Cadaveric Temporal Bone Dissection: Is It Obsolete Today?,” Int. Arch. Otorhinolaryngol., vol. 18, no. 01, pp. 063–067, 2013, doi: 10.1055/s-0033-1351681. [3] S. Negi, S. Dhiman, and R. K. Sharma, “Basics and applications of rapid prototyping medical models,” Rapid Prototyp. J., vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 256–267, 2014, doi: 10.1108/RPJ-07-2012-0065. [4] C. L. Cheung and N. R. Saber, Application of 3D Printing in Medical Simulation and Education. 2016 by C.L. Cheung and N.R. Saber. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, 2016. [5] T. Fritz, N. Stachel, and B. J. Braun, “Evidence in surgical training- A review,” Innov. Surg. Sci., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 7–13, 2019, doi: 10.1515/iss-2018-0026. [6] J. Hoogenes and E. D. Matsumoto, Simulation Surgical Models: Surgeon Perspectives. 2016 by J. Hoogenes and E.D. Matsumoto. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, 2016. [7] F. Laxague, “Simulation in surgical education: resident’s point of view,” AME Surg. J., vol. 1, pp. 16–16, 2021, doi: 10.21037/asj-21-41. [8] R. Michaels et al., “3D printing in surgical simulation: emphasized importance in the COVID-19 pandemic era,” J. 3D Print. Med., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 5–9, 2021, doi: 10.2217/3dp-2021-0009. [9] O. McLaren, C. Perkins, and D. Alderson, “The effect of surgical complications on ENT trainees,” J. Laryngol. Otol., vol. 135, no. 4, pp. 293–296, 2021, doi: 10.1017/S0022215121000797. [10] P. C. Staropoli et al., “Surgical Simulation Training Reduces Intraoperative Cataract Surgery Complications among Residents,” Simul. Healthc., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 11–15, 2018, doi: 10.1097/SIH.0000000000000255.
Journal of Polymer and Composites
| Volume | |
| Received | March 21, 2024 |
| Accepted | May 23, 2024 |
| Published | July 9, 2024 |