Do 3D Printing Models Improve Anatomical Teaching About Hepatic Segments to Medical Students? A Randomized Controlled Study

Background It is a difficult and frustrating task for young surgeons and medical students to understand the anatomy of hepatic segments. We tried to develop an optimal 3D printing model of hepatic segments as a teaching aid to improve the teaching of hepatic segments. Methods A fresh human cadaveric...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:World journal of surgery 2016-08, Vol.40 (8), p.1969-1976
Hauptverfasser: Kong, Xiangxue, Nie, Lanying, Zhang, Huijian, Wang, Zhanglin, Ye, Qiang, Tang, Lei, Huang, Wenhua, Li, Jianyi
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background It is a difficult and frustrating task for young surgeons and medical students to understand the anatomy of hepatic segments. We tried to develop an optimal 3D printing model of hepatic segments as a teaching aid to improve the teaching of hepatic segments. Methods A fresh human cadaveric liver without hepatic disease was CT scanned. After 3D reconstruction, three types of 3D computer models of hepatic structures were designed and 3D printed as models of hepatic segments without parenchyma (type 1) and with transparent parenchyma (type 2), and hepatic ducts with segmental partitions (type 3). These models were evaluated by six experts using a five-point Likert scale. Ninety two medical freshmen were randomized into four groups to learn hepatic segments with the aid of the three types of models and traditional anatomic atlas (TAA). Their results of two quizzes were compared to evaluate the teaching effects of the four methods. Results Three types of models were successful produced which displayed the structures of hepatic segments. By experts’ evaluation, type 3 model was better than type 1 and 2 models in anatomical condition, type 2 and 3 models were better than type 1 model in tactility, and type 3 model was better than type 1 model in overall satisfaction ( P  
ISSN:0364-2313
1432-2323
DOI:10.1007/s00268-016-3541-y