Are 3D-printed anatomical models of the ear effective for teaching anatomy? A comparative pilot study versus cadaveric models.

PURPOSE: Despite the combination of chalkboard lectures and cadaveric models, the ear remains a complex anatomical structure that is difficult for medical students to grasp. The aim of this study was to evaluate the contribution of a 3D-printed ear model for educating undergraduate medical students by comparing it with a conventional cadaveric model. METHODS: Models of the ear comprising the outer ear, tympanic membrane, ossicles and inner ear were modeled and then 3D-printed at 6:1 and 10:1 scales based on cadaveric dissection and CT, cone-beam CT and micro/nano CT scans. Cadaveric models included two partially dissected dry temporal bones and ossicles. Twenty-four 3rd year medical students were given separate access to cadaveric models (n = 12) or 3D-printed models (n = 12). A pre-test and two post-tests were carried out to assess knowledge (n = 24). A satisfaction questionnaire focusing solely on the 3D-printed model, comprising 17 items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale, was completed by all study participants. A 5-point Likert scale questionnaire comprising four items (realism, color, quality and satisfaction with the 3D-printed ear model) was given to three expert anatomy Professors. RESULTS: The test scores on the first post-test were higher for the students who had used the 3D-printed models (p < 0.05). Overall satisfaction among the students and the experts was very high, averaging 4.7 on a 5-point Likert-type satisfaction scale. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the overall pedagogical value of a 3D-printed model for learning ear anatomy.

Assessment of a New Medical Device (PirifixTM) for Positioning and Maintaining the Upper Dental Arch during Le Fort I Osteotomy.

INTRODUCTION: Several medical devices (MDs) are used to assist surgeons in positioning the upper dental arch (UDA) during Le Fort I osteotomies (LFIOs). Some only allow holding, others only positioning. This study aimed to assess the accuracy of a new MD (PirifixTM) coupling these two functions during LFIO on 3D-printed models. MATERIALS AND METHODS: DICOM data were selected from patients who underwent surgical planning for LFIO between 27 July 2020 and 1 December 2022. Their anatomy was reproduced after segmentation, planning, and stereolithography in two models. Each model was assigned to one of two surgical groups: the control group (positioning by occlusal splint) and the PirifixTM group. Each patient's model was planned with the objective of horizontalizing and recentering the UDA. After positioning, models were digitalized using Einscan Pro 2X and compared to the planned model with CloudCompare. The statistical analysis was performed using the Wilcoxon Mann-Whitney test. The result was considered significant if the p-value was less than 0.05. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were selected. Forty-two anatomical models were 3D-printed. The mean difference compared to the planned and corrected positions was 0.69 mm for the control group and 0.84 mm for the PirifixTM group (p = 0.036). CONCLUSION: PirifixTM may be a new alternative to available MDs. Further investigations are needed to describe the relationship between the device and facial soft tissues.