This retrospective analysis compares surgical times using 3D printing in cancer treatment, suggesting enhanced efficiency and value for providers.
Introduction: The use of 3D-printed models in surgical planning has gained traction in light of its potential to improve precision and patient outcomes. The objective of this study was to review data and provide a time and value analysis of the use of 3D printing at a National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated comprehensive cancer center. The estimated time of surgical procedures for surgical planning was compared with the time required for procedures that did not use 3D printing. Providers who used 3D printing completed surveys, and then the results of said surveys were analyzed to assess the value of 3D printing. Materials and Methods: Electronic health records were reviewed for patients who underwent hemipelvectomies with and without 3D printing. A list of 20 observations involving 3D printing was used as a baseline sample and matched with another 20 observations that did not utilize 3D printing. Electronic health records were reviewed to obtain mean estimates of the procedure time. The data was collected and analyzed between January 2018 and April 2025. Results: The mean surgery time for procedures using 3D printing was 868 min, compared to 993 min for procedures that did not utilize 3D printing. In contrast, the median procedure times were 907.5 min for procedures using 3D printing and 945.0 min for those that did not utilize 3D printing. Most providers (85.7%) felt that using 3D-printed models or guides was important. Similarly, 80% responded that using a 3D-printed model or guide saved them time, and another 73.3% responded that after using the 3D-printed model, they were confident in their treatment plan. Conclusions: Using 3D printing for surgical cases at the comprehensive cancer center saved procedure time and added value for the surgeons.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rao et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: