Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Advances in medical imaging and three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction software have enabled a proliferation of 3D modeling and 3D printing for clinical applications. In particular, 3D printing has garnered an extraordinary media presence over the past few years. There is growing optimism that 3D printing can address patient specificity and complexity for improved interventional and surgical planning. Will this relatively untested technology bring about a paradigm shift in the clinical environment, or is it just a transient fad? RECENT FINDINGS: Case studies and series centered around 3D printing are omnipresent in clinical and engineering journals. These primarily qualitative studies support the potential efficacy of the emerging technology. Few studies analyze the value of 3D printing, weighing its potential benefits against increasing costs (e.g., institutional overhead, labor, and materials). SUMMARY: Clinical integration of 3D printing is growing rapidly, and its adoption into clinical practice presents unique workflow challenges. There are numerous clinical trials on the horizon that will finally help to elucidate the measured impact of 3D printing on clinical outcomes through quantitative analyses of clinical and economic metrics. The contrived integration of 3D printing into clinical practice seems all but certain as the value of this technology becomes more and more evident.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalCurrent Opinion in Cardiology
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Nov 18 2016

Fingerprint

Technology
Biomedical Engineering
Workflow
Three Dimensional Printing
Diagnostic Imaging
Software
Economics
Clinical Trials
Costs and Cost Analysis
Optimism

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Three-dimensional printing : changing clinical care or just a passing fad? / Ryan, Justin; Gregg, Chelsea; Frakes, David; Pophal, Stephen.

In: Current Opinion in Cardiology, 18.11.2016.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{b6ea9e8e33724054989546194957bc23,
title = "Three-dimensional printing: changing clinical care or just a passing fad?",
abstract = "PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Advances in medical imaging and three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction software have enabled a proliferation of 3D modeling and 3D printing for clinical applications. In particular, 3D printing has garnered an extraordinary media presence over the past few years. There is growing optimism that 3D printing can address patient specificity and complexity for improved interventional and surgical planning. Will this relatively untested technology bring about a paradigm shift in the clinical environment, or is it just a transient fad? RECENT FINDINGS: Case studies and series centered around 3D printing are omnipresent in clinical and engineering journals. These primarily qualitative studies support the potential efficacy of the emerging technology. Few studies analyze the value of 3D printing, weighing its potential benefits against increasing costs (e.g., institutional overhead, labor, and materials). SUMMARY: Clinical integration of 3D printing is growing rapidly, and its adoption into clinical practice presents unique workflow challenges. There are numerous clinical trials on the horizon that will finally help to elucidate the measured impact of 3D printing on clinical outcomes through quantitative analyses of clinical and economic metrics. The contrived integration of 3D printing into clinical practice seems all but certain as the value of this technology becomes more and more evident.",
author = "Justin Ryan and Chelsea Gregg and David Frakes and Stephen Pophal",
year = "2016",
month = "11",
day = "18",
doi = "10.1097/HCO.0000000000000352",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Current Opinion in Cardiology",
issn = "0268-4705",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Three-dimensional printing

T2 - changing clinical care or just a passing fad?

AU - Ryan, Justin

AU - Gregg, Chelsea

AU - Frakes, David

AU - Pophal, Stephen

PY - 2016/11/18

Y1 - 2016/11/18

N2 - PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Advances in medical imaging and three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction software have enabled a proliferation of 3D modeling and 3D printing for clinical applications. In particular, 3D printing has garnered an extraordinary media presence over the past few years. There is growing optimism that 3D printing can address patient specificity and complexity for improved interventional and surgical planning. Will this relatively untested technology bring about a paradigm shift in the clinical environment, or is it just a transient fad? RECENT FINDINGS: Case studies and series centered around 3D printing are omnipresent in clinical and engineering journals. These primarily qualitative studies support the potential efficacy of the emerging technology. Few studies analyze the value of 3D printing, weighing its potential benefits against increasing costs (e.g., institutional overhead, labor, and materials). SUMMARY: Clinical integration of 3D printing is growing rapidly, and its adoption into clinical practice presents unique workflow challenges. There are numerous clinical trials on the horizon that will finally help to elucidate the measured impact of 3D printing on clinical outcomes through quantitative analyses of clinical and economic metrics. The contrived integration of 3D printing into clinical practice seems all but certain as the value of this technology becomes more and more evident.

AB - PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Advances in medical imaging and three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction software have enabled a proliferation of 3D modeling and 3D printing for clinical applications. In particular, 3D printing has garnered an extraordinary media presence over the past few years. There is growing optimism that 3D printing can address patient specificity and complexity for improved interventional and surgical planning. Will this relatively untested technology bring about a paradigm shift in the clinical environment, or is it just a transient fad? RECENT FINDINGS: Case studies and series centered around 3D printing are omnipresent in clinical and engineering journals. These primarily qualitative studies support the potential efficacy of the emerging technology. Few studies analyze the value of 3D printing, weighing its potential benefits against increasing costs (e.g., institutional overhead, labor, and materials). SUMMARY: Clinical integration of 3D printing is growing rapidly, and its adoption into clinical practice presents unique workflow challenges. There are numerous clinical trials on the horizon that will finally help to elucidate the measured impact of 3D printing on clinical outcomes through quantitative analyses of clinical and economic metrics. The contrived integration of 3D printing into clinical practice seems all but certain as the value of this technology becomes more and more evident.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84995748154&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84995748154&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/HCO.0000000000000352

DO - 10.1097/HCO.0000000000000352

M3 - Article

JO - Current Opinion in Cardiology

JF - Current Opinion in Cardiology

SN - 0268-4705

ER -