Home > Journals > Minerva Ginecologica > Past Issues > Minerva Ginecologica 2019 June;71(3) > Minerva Ginecologica 2019 June;71(3):235-44

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe PROMO
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Cite this article as

 

REVIEW   

Minerva Ginecologica 2019 June;71(3):235-44

DOI: 10.23736/S0026-4784.19.04319-3

Copyright © 2019 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Three-dimensionally-printed models in reproductive surgery: systematic review and clinical applications

Marina Z. BARBOSA 1, 2, Daniel S. ZYLBERSZTEJN 1, Leandro A. de MATTOS 3, Luiz F. CARVALHO 1, 2

1 Baby Center, Institute for Reproductive Medicine, São Paulo, Brazil; 2 Institute of Clinical Research and Teaching Development, São Paulo, Brazil; 3 Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil



INTRODUCTION: 3D printing has wide application in medicine while it provides customizability and precision for anatomical model development. Our aims were to perform a systematic review and to explore the use of 3D printing applications on human reproduction and reproductive surgery.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We have performed a systematic review in PubMed database to assess previous publications within 3D printing in human reproduction and gynecology. We have developed 3D models according to patients’ magnetic resonance images (MRI). MRI were transformed into DICOM images that originated our 3D virtual models and PolyJet technology was applied for the printing process. We included two infertile patients in reproductive age with surgical indication for hysteroscopy septoplasty and myomectomy.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Of 1965 studies searched, we excluded 1934 publications based on their titles. Abstracts of 31 remained studies were read, and 24 studies were selected for full-text analysis. We included 11 studies for the systematic review, based on our eligibility criteria. We have designed four 3D models (uterus, ovaries, uterine cervix and uterus with fibroids) that provided enriched information to improve pre-surgical planning, medical training, fertility-sparing surgery, patient comprehension of surgical procedures and assisted reproduction applications.
CONCLUSIONS: 3D models for human reproduction are feasible. They might improve assisted reproductive techniques, help in pre-surgical planning for reproductive surgeries, and provide accurate measures of ovarian reserve. Besides, we see future applications in endometrioma research and in the fabrication of devices, such as embryo transfer catheter and a 3D printed embryo.


KEY WORDS: Anatomic models; Three-dimensional printing; Assisted reproductive techniques; Gynecologic surgical procedures

top of page