The accuracy of computed tomography scans for rapid prototyping of canine skulls
This study's objective was to determine the accuracy of using current computed tomography (CT) scan and software techniques for rapid prototyping by quantifying the margin of error between CT models and laser scans of canine skull specimens. Twenty canine skulls of varying morphology were selec...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | PloS one 2019-03, Vol.14 (3), p.e0214123-e0214123 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | e0214123 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | e0214123 |
container_title | PloS one |
container_volume | 14 |
creator | Comrie, Michaela L Monteith, Gabrielle Zur Linden, Alex Oblak, Michelle Phillips, John James, Fiona M K |
description | This study's objective was to determine the accuracy of using current computed tomography (CT) scan and software techniques for rapid prototyping by quantifying the margin of error between CT models and laser scans of canine skull specimens. Twenty canine skulls of varying morphology were selected from an anatomy collection at a veterinary school. CT scans (bone and standard algorithms) were performed for each skull, and data segmented (testing two lower threshold settings of 226HU and -650HU) into 3-D CT models. Laser scans were then performed on each skull. The CT models were compared to the corresponding laser scan to determine the error generated from the different types of CT model parameters. This error was then compared between the different types of CT models to determine the most accurate parameters. The mean errors for the 226HU CT models, both bone and standard algorithms, were not significant from zero error (p = 0.1076 and p = 0.0580, respectively). The mean errors for both -650HU CT models were significant from zero error (p < 0.001). Significant differences were detected between CT models for 3 CT model comparisons: Bone (p < 0.0001); Standard (p < 0.0001); and -650HU (p < 0.0001). For 226HU CT models, a significant difference was not detected between CT models (p = 0.2268). Independent of the parameters tested, the 3-D models derived from CT imaging accurately represent the real skull dimensions, with CT models differing less than 0.42 mm from the real skull dimensions. The 226HU threshold was more accurate than the -650HU threshold. For the 226HU CT models, accuracy was not dependent on the CT algorithm. For the -650 CT models, bone was more accurate than standard algorithms. Knowing the inherent error of this procedure is important for use in 3-D printing for surgical planning and medical education. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1371/journal.pone.0214123 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_2197762695</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A580067905</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_b7e4be5d7d23484fafb5edb4e82d85e3</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A580067905</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-cca4df3b2f80870697964062e1192876f1e903d52e1ce91b45224cf3bf7fcde43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkl2L1DAUhoso7rr6D0QLgujFjPlq2t4Iy-LHwMKKrt6GNDnpZOw0NUnF-fdmdrrLVPZCctH05HnfJCdvlj3HaIlpid9t3Oh72S0H18MSEcwwoQ-yU1xTsuAE0YdH85PsSQgbhApacf44O6GoRlVB-Wn25XoNuVRq9FLtcmdy5bbDGEHn0W1d6-Ww3uVByT7kxvk8_VudD95FF3eD7dsbiextD3n4OXZdeJo9MrIL8Gz6nmXfP364vvi8uLz6tLo4v1woXpO4UEoybWhDTIWqEvG6rDlDnADGNalKbjDUiOoiFRTUuGEFIUwlgSmN0sDoWfby4Dt0LoipGUEQXJclJ7wuErE6ENrJjRi83Uq_E05acVNwvhXSR6s6EE0JrIFCl5pQVjEjTVOAbhhURFcF0OT1ftptbLagFfTRy25mOl_p7Vq07rfgjFJCy2TwZjLw7tcIIYqtDQq6TvbgxsO5qyr1YH_uV_-g999uolqZLmB749K-am8qzosKIV7WaE8t76HS0LC1KiXH2FSfCd7OBImJ8Ce2cgxBrL59_X_26secfX3ErkF2cR1cN0br-jAH2QFU3oXgwdw1GSOxD_5tN8Q--GIKfpK9OH6gO9Ft0ulfsZP-FQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2197762695</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The accuracy of computed tomography scans for rapid prototyping of canine skulls</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</source><creator>Comrie, Michaela L ; Monteith, Gabrielle ; Zur Linden, Alex ; Oblak, Michelle ; Phillips, John ; James, Fiona M K</creator><creatorcontrib>Comrie, Michaela L ; Monteith, Gabrielle ; Zur Linden, Alex ; Oblak, Michelle ; Phillips, John ; James, Fiona M K ; Ontario Veterinary College Rapid Prototyping of Patient-specific Implants for Dogs (RaPPID) group ; on behalf of the Ontario Veterinary College Rapid Prototyping of Patient-specific Implants for Dogs (RaPPID) group</creatorcontrib><description>This study's objective was to determine the accuracy of using current computed tomography (CT) scan and software techniques for rapid prototyping by quantifying the margin of error between CT models and laser scans of canine skull specimens. Twenty canine skulls of varying morphology were selected from an anatomy collection at a veterinary school. CT scans (bone and standard algorithms) were performed for each skull, and data segmented (testing two lower threshold settings of 226HU and -650HU) into 3-D CT models. Laser scans were then performed on each skull. The CT models were compared to the corresponding laser scan to determine the error generated from the different types of CT model parameters. This error was then compared between the different types of CT models to determine the most accurate parameters. The mean errors for the 226HU CT models, both bone and standard algorithms, were not significant from zero error (p = 0.1076 and p = 0.0580, respectively). The mean errors for both -650HU CT models were significant from zero error (p < 0.001). Significant differences were detected between CT models for 3 CT model comparisons: Bone (p < 0.0001); Standard (p < 0.0001); and -650HU (p < 0.0001). For 226HU CT models, a significant difference was not detected between CT models (p = 0.2268). Independent of the parameters tested, the 3-D models derived from CT imaging accurately represent the real skull dimensions, with CT models differing less than 0.42 mm from the real skull dimensions. The 226HU threshold was more accurate than the -650HU threshold. For the 226HU CT models, accuracy was not dependent on the CT algorithm. For the -650 CT models, bone was more accurate than standard algorithms. Knowing the inherent error of this procedure is important for use in 3-D printing for surgical planning and medical education.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0214123</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30908536</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>3D printing ; Algorithms ; Analysis ; Animals ; Biology and Life Sciences ; CAT scans ; Comparative analysis ; Computation ; Computed tomography ; Diagnostic imaging ; Dogs ; Education ; Engineering and Technology ; Error detection ; Imaging, Three-Dimensional ; Lasers ; Mathematical models ; Medical imaging ; Medical imaging equipment ; Medical personnel training ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; Model accuracy ; Morphology ; Parameters ; Rapid prototyping ; Research and Analysis Methods ; Skull ; Skull - diagnostic imaging ; Surgery ; Three dimensional models ; Three dimensional printing ; Tomography ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed ; Veterinary colleges</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2019-03, Vol.14 (3), p.e0214123-e0214123</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2019 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2019 Comrie et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2019 Comrie et al 2019 Comrie et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-cca4df3b2f80870697964062e1192876f1e903d52e1ce91b45224cf3bf7fcde43</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-cca4df3b2f80870697964062e1192876f1e903d52e1ce91b45224cf3bf7fcde43</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-4331-4993 ; 0000-0002-5663-0197 ; 0000-0001-8489-4643</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6433237/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6433237/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,860,881,2096,2915,23845,27901,27902,53766,53768,79342,79343</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30908536$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Comrie, Michaela L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Monteith, Gabrielle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zur Linden, Alex</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oblak, Michelle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Phillips, John</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>James, Fiona M K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ontario Veterinary College Rapid Prototyping of Patient-specific Implants for Dogs (RaPPID) group</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>on behalf of the Ontario Veterinary College Rapid Prototyping of Patient-specific Implants for Dogs (RaPPID) group</creatorcontrib><title>The accuracy of computed tomography scans for rapid prototyping of canine skulls</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>This study's objective was to determine the accuracy of using current computed tomography (CT) scan and software techniques for rapid prototyping by quantifying the margin of error between CT models and laser scans of canine skull specimens. Twenty canine skulls of varying morphology were selected from an anatomy collection at a veterinary school. CT scans (bone and standard algorithms) were performed for each skull, and data segmented (testing two lower threshold settings of 226HU and -650HU) into 3-D CT models. Laser scans were then performed on each skull. The CT models were compared to the corresponding laser scan to determine the error generated from the different types of CT model parameters. This error was then compared between the different types of CT models to determine the most accurate parameters. The mean errors for the 226HU CT models, both bone and standard algorithms, were not significant from zero error (p = 0.1076 and p = 0.0580, respectively). The mean errors for both -650HU CT models were significant from zero error (p < 0.001). Significant differences were detected between CT models for 3 CT model comparisons: Bone (p < 0.0001); Standard (p < 0.0001); and -650HU (p < 0.0001). For 226HU CT models, a significant difference was not detected between CT models (p = 0.2268). Independent of the parameters tested, the 3-D models derived from CT imaging accurately represent the real skull dimensions, with CT models differing less than 0.42 mm from the real skull dimensions. The 226HU threshold was more accurate than the -650HU threshold. For the 226HU CT models, accuracy was not dependent on the CT algorithm. For the -650 CT models, bone was more accurate than standard algorithms. Knowing the inherent error of this procedure is important for use in 3-D printing for surgical planning and medical education.</description><subject>3D printing</subject><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Biology and Life Sciences</subject><subject>CAT scans</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Computation</subject><subject>Computed tomography</subject><subject>Diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Dogs</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Engineering and Technology</subject><subject>Error detection</subject><subject>Imaging, Three-Dimensional</subject><subject>Lasers</subject><subject>Mathematical models</subject><subject>Medical imaging</subject><subject>Medical imaging equipment</subject><subject>Medical personnel training</subject><subject>Medicine and Health Sciences</subject><subject>Model accuracy</subject><subject>Morphology</subject><subject>Parameters</subject><subject>Rapid prototyping</subject><subject>Research and Analysis Methods</subject><subject>Skull</subject><subject>Skull - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Three dimensional models</subject><subject>Three dimensional printing</subject><subject>Tomography</subject><subject>Tomography, X-Ray Computed</subject><subject>Veterinary colleges</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkl2L1DAUhoso7rr6D0QLgujFjPlq2t4Iy-LHwMKKrt6GNDnpZOw0NUnF-fdmdrrLVPZCctH05HnfJCdvlj3HaIlpid9t3Oh72S0H18MSEcwwoQ-yU1xTsuAE0YdH85PsSQgbhApacf44O6GoRlVB-Wn25XoNuVRq9FLtcmdy5bbDGEHn0W1d6-Ww3uVByT7kxvk8_VudD95FF3eD7dsbiextD3n4OXZdeJo9MrIL8Gz6nmXfP364vvi8uLz6tLo4v1woXpO4UEoybWhDTIWqEvG6rDlDnADGNalKbjDUiOoiFRTUuGEFIUwlgSmN0sDoWfby4Dt0LoipGUEQXJclJ7wuErE6ENrJjRi83Uq_E05acVNwvhXSR6s6EE0JrIFCl5pQVjEjTVOAbhhURFcF0OT1ftptbLagFfTRy25mOl_p7Vq07rfgjFJCy2TwZjLw7tcIIYqtDQq6TvbgxsO5qyr1YH_uV_-g999uolqZLmB749K-am8qzosKIV7WaE8t76HS0LC1KiXH2FSfCd7OBImJ8Ce2cgxBrL59_X_26secfX3ErkF2cR1cN0br-jAH2QFU3oXgwdw1GSOxD_5tN8Q--GIKfpK9OH6gO9Ft0ulfsZP-FQ</recordid><startdate>20190325</startdate><enddate>20190325</enddate><creator>Comrie, Michaela L</creator><creator>Monteith, Gabrielle</creator><creator>Zur Linden, Alex</creator><creator>Oblak, Michelle</creator><creator>Phillips, John</creator><creator>James, Fiona M K</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4331-4993</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5663-0197</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8489-4643</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20190325</creationdate><title>The accuracy of computed tomography scans for rapid prototyping of canine skulls</title><author>Comrie, Michaela L ; Monteith, Gabrielle ; Zur Linden, Alex ; Oblak, Michelle ; Phillips, John ; James, Fiona M K</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-cca4df3b2f80870697964062e1192876f1e903d52e1ce91b45224cf3bf7fcde43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>3D printing</topic><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Biology and Life Sciences</topic><topic>CAT scans</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Computation</topic><topic>Computed tomography</topic><topic>Diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Dogs</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Engineering and Technology</topic><topic>Error detection</topic><topic>Imaging, Three-Dimensional</topic><topic>Lasers</topic><topic>Mathematical models</topic><topic>Medical imaging</topic><topic>Medical imaging equipment</topic><topic>Medical personnel training</topic><topic>Medicine and Health Sciences</topic><topic>Model accuracy</topic><topic>Morphology</topic><topic>Parameters</topic><topic>Rapid prototyping</topic><topic>Research and Analysis Methods</topic><topic>Skull</topic><topic>Skull - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Three dimensional models</topic><topic>Three dimensional printing</topic><topic>Tomography</topic><topic>Tomography, X-Ray Computed</topic><topic>Veterinary colleges</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Comrie, Michaela L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Monteith, Gabrielle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zur Linden, Alex</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oblak, Michelle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Phillips, John</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>James, Fiona M K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ontario Veterinary College Rapid Prototyping of Patient-specific Implants for Dogs (RaPPID) group</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>on behalf of the Ontario Veterinary College Rapid Prototyping of Patient-specific Implants for Dogs (RaPPID) group</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Comrie, Michaela L</au><au>Monteith, Gabrielle</au><au>Zur Linden, Alex</au><au>Oblak, Michelle</au><au>Phillips, John</au><au>James, Fiona M K</au><aucorp>Ontario Veterinary College Rapid Prototyping of Patient-specific Implants for Dogs (RaPPID) group</aucorp><aucorp>on behalf of the Ontario Veterinary College Rapid Prototyping of Patient-specific Implants for Dogs (RaPPID) group</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The accuracy of computed tomography scans for rapid prototyping of canine skulls</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2019-03-25</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>14</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>e0214123</spage><epage>e0214123</epage><pages>e0214123-e0214123</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>This study's objective was to determine the accuracy of using current computed tomography (CT) scan and software techniques for rapid prototyping by quantifying the margin of error between CT models and laser scans of canine skull specimens. Twenty canine skulls of varying morphology were selected from an anatomy collection at a veterinary school. CT scans (bone and standard algorithms) were performed for each skull, and data segmented (testing two lower threshold settings of 226HU and -650HU) into 3-D CT models. Laser scans were then performed on each skull. The CT models were compared to the corresponding laser scan to determine the error generated from the different types of CT model parameters. This error was then compared between the different types of CT models to determine the most accurate parameters. The mean errors for the 226HU CT models, both bone and standard algorithms, were not significant from zero error (p = 0.1076 and p = 0.0580, respectively). The mean errors for both -650HU CT models were significant from zero error (p < 0.001). Significant differences were detected between CT models for 3 CT model comparisons: Bone (p < 0.0001); Standard (p < 0.0001); and -650HU (p < 0.0001). For 226HU CT models, a significant difference was not detected between CT models (p = 0.2268). Independent of the parameters tested, the 3-D models derived from CT imaging accurately represent the real skull dimensions, with CT models differing less than 0.42 mm from the real skull dimensions. The 226HU threshold was more accurate than the -650HU threshold. For the 226HU CT models, accuracy was not dependent on the CT algorithm. For the -650 CT models, bone was more accurate than standard algorithms. Knowing the inherent error of this procedure is important for use in 3-D printing for surgical planning and medical education.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>30908536</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0214123</doi><tpages>e0214123</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4331-4993</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5663-0197</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8489-4643</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1932-6203 |
ispartof | PloS one, 2019-03, Vol.14 (3), p.e0214123-e0214123 |
issn | 1932-6203 1932-6203 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_plos_journals_2197762695 |
source | MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry; Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
subjects | 3D printing Algorithms Analysis Animals Biology and Life Sciences CAT scans Comparative analysis Computation Computed tomography Diagnostic imaging Dogs Education Engineering and Technology Error detection Imaging, Three-Dimensional Lasers Mathematical models Medical imaging Medical imaging equipment Medical personnel training Medicine and Health Sciences Model accuracy Morphology Parameters Rapid prototyping Research and Analysis Methods Skull Skull - diagnostic imaging Surgery Three dimensional models Three dimensional printing Tomography Tomography, X-Ray Computed Veterinary colleges |
title | The accuracy of computed tomography scans for rapid prototyping of canine skulls |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-12T19%3A31%3A16IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20accuracy%20of%20computed%20tomography%20scans%20for%20rapid%20prototyping%20of%20canine%20skulls&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Comrie,%20Michaela%20L&rft.aucorp=Ontario%20Veterinary%20College%20Rapid%20Prototyping%20of%20Patient-specific%20Implants%20for%20Dogs%20(RaPPID)%20group&rft.date=2019-03-25&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=e0214123&rft.epage=e0214123&rft.pages=e0214123-e0214123&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0214123&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA580067905%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2197762695&rft_id=info:pmid/30908536&rft_galeid=A580067905&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_b7e4be5d7d23484fafb5edb4e82d85e3&rfr_iscdi=true |