3D printed ventilation tubes and their effect on biological models.

BACKGROUND: Acute otitis media (AOM) causes inflammation and hearing loss. Ventilation tubes are key in treatment. 3D printing improves prostheses in otorhinolaryngology, offering precision and greater adaptability. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An experimental study was conducted with Wistar rats from July to December 2020. 3D tympanostomy tube models were designed, with technical specifications and tests performed on inexpensive 3D printers. The tympanostomy tube was inserted endoscopically. RESULTS: Procedures were performed on five rats with implants in both ears. Pre-intervention pathologies, such as atical retraction and glue ear, were found. The PLA-printed tympanostomy tube showed improvement after adjustments. Histopathological results revealed significant middle and inner ear damage. CONCLUSION: In our study, the design and 3D printing of implants fulfilled the desired functions when modified, with a height of 5 mm. Complications included PLA degradation and ear damage. There were no adverse events during observation, highlighting the need for further research on 3D-printed implants.

Diagnostic Efficacy of Chest Computed Tomography with a Dual-Reviewer Approach in Patients Diagnosed with Pneumonia Secondary to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2.

To compare the diagnostic effectiveness of chest computed tomography (CT) utilizing a single- versus a dual-reviewer approach in patients with pneumonia secondary to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), we conducted a retrospective observational study of data from a cross-section of 4809 patients with probable SARS-CoV-2 from March to November 2020. All patients had a CT radiological report and reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (PCR) results. A dual-reviewer approach was applied to two groups while conducting a comparative examination of the data. Reviewer 1 reported 108 patients negative and 374 patients positive for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in group A, and 266 negative and 142 positive in group B. Reviewer 2 reported 150 patients negative and 332 patients positive for COVID-19 in group A, and 277 negative and 131 positive in group B. The consensus result reported 87 patients negative and 395 positive for COVID-19 in group A and 274 negative and 134 positive in group B. These findings suggest that a dual-reviewer approach improves chest CT diagnosis compared to a conventional single-reviewer approach.