3D imaging technologies in minimally invasive kidney and prostate cancer surgery: which is the urologists' perception?
Journal
Minerva urology and nephrology
ISSN: 2724-6442
Titre abrégé: Minerva Urol Nephrol
Pays: Italy
ID NLM: 101777299
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2022
Apr 2022
Historique:
pubmed:
27
3
2021
medline:
31
3
2022
entrez:
26
3
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Many specific 3D imaging technologies are currently available for the practising urologists. The aim of the study was to assess their perception about different 3D imaging tools in the field of prostate and kidney cancer surgery. All the attendees of the 8th Techno-Urology-Meeting were asked to fill a questionnaire regarding the role of 3D virtual reconstruction PDFs, 3D printing models, augmented-reality (AR) and mixed reality technology in the setting of surgical planning, patient counselling, intraoperative guidance and training for kidney and prostate cancer surgery; Moreover the different materials used for 3D printing were compared to assess the most suitable in reproducing the organ and tumor features, as well as their estimated cost and production time. The population consisted of 180 attendees. Overall, AR was the preferred option for intraoperative guidance and training, in both prostate (55% and 38.3%) and kidney cancer surgery (58.3% and 40%). HoloLens (Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA, USA) was perceived as the best imaging technology for the surgical planning (50% for prostate and 60% for kidney), whereas printed models for patients counselling (66.7% for prostate and 61.7% for kidney). Fused deposition models were deemed as the best printing technology in representing kidney anatomy and renal tumor location (40%), while silicon (46.7%) and Polyjet (36.7%) models for prostate anatomy and cancer location. Finally, attendees demonstrated poor knowledge of 3D printing costs and production times. Our study shows the perceptions of a heterogeneous surrogate of practicing urologists about the role and potential applications of 3D imaging technologies in daily surgical practice.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Many specific 3D imaging technologies are currently available for the practising urologists. The aim of the study was to assess their perception about different 3D imaging tools in the field of prostate and kidney cancer surgery.
METHODS
METHODS
All the attendees of the 8th Techno-Urology-Meeting were asked to fill a questionnaire regarding the role of 3D virtual reconstruction PDFs, 3D printing models, augmented-reality (AR) and mixed reality technology in the setting of surgical planning, patient counselling, intraoperative guidance and training for kidney and prostate cancer surgery; Moreover the different materials used for 3D printing were compared to assess the most suitable in reproducing the organ and tumor features, as well as their estimated cost and production time.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The population consisted of 180 attendees. Overall, AR was the preferred option for intraoperative guidance and training, in both prostate (55% and 38.3%) and kidney cancer surgery (58.3% and 40%). HoloLens (Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA, USA) was perceived as the best imaging technology for the surgical planning (50% for prostate and 60% for kidney), whereas printed models for patients counselling (66.7% for prostate and 61.7% for kidney). Fused deposition models were deemed as the best printing technology in representing kidney anatomy and renal tumor location (40%), while silicon (46.7%) and Polyjet (36.7%) models for prostate anatomy and cancer location. Finally, attendees demonstrated poor knowledge of 3D printing costs and production times.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our study shows the perceptions of a heterogeneous surrogate of practicing urologists about the role and potential applications of 3D imaging technologies in daily surgical practice.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33769019
pii: S2724-6051.21.04131-X
doi: 10.23736/S2724-6051.21.04131-X
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM