ABSTRACT
Introduction: In recent years, the use of 3D printing in medicine has grown exponentially, but the use of 3D technology has not been equally adopted by the different medical specialties. Published 3D printing activity in general thoracic surgery is scarce and has been mostly limited to case reports. The aim of this report was to reflect on the results and lessons learned from a newly created multidisciplinary and multicenter 3D unit of the Spanish Society of Thoracic Surgery (SECT). Methods: This is a pilot study to determine the feasibility and usefulness of printing 3D models for patients with thoracic malignancy or airway complications, based on real data. We designed a point-of-care 3D printing workflow involving thoracic surgeons, radiologists with experience in intrathoracic pathology, and engineers with experience in additive manufacturing. Results: In the first year of operation we generated 26 three-dimensional models out of 27 cases received (96.3%). In 9 cases a virtual model was sufficient for optimal patient handling, while in 17 cases a 3D model was printed. Per pathology, cases were classified as airway stenosis after lung transplantation (7 cases, 25.9%), tracheal pathology (7 cases, 25.9%), chest tumors (6 cases, 22.2%) carcinoid tumors (4 cases, 14.8%), mediastinal tumors (2 cases, 7.4%) and Pancoast tumors (one case, 3.7%). Conclusion: A multidisciplinary 3D laboratory is feasible in a hospital setting, and working as a multicenter group increases the number of cases and diversity of pathologies thus providing further opportunity to study the benefits of the 3D printing technology in general thoracic surgery.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Primary care is the ideal setting for early identification of patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). NAFLD is a potentially progressive disease that may lead to cirrhosis and liver cancer but is frequently underrecognized because subjects at risk are often not evaluated. Controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) is a reliable method for non-invasive quantification of liver fat. It has the advantage of simultaneous measurement of liver stiffness (LS), an estimate of liver fibrosis. There is no information on CAP in subjects with risk factors from primary care. AIM: To investigate the prevalence of hepatic steatosis, as estimated by CAP, in subjects from the community with metabolic risk factors and correlate findings with clinical and biochemical characteristics and LS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Population-based study of 215 subjects with metabolic risk factors without known liver disease identified randomly from a primary care center. A control group of 80 subjects matched by age and sex without metabolic risk factors was also studied. CAP and LS were assessed using Fibroscan. RESULTS: Subjects with risk factors had CAP values higher than those of control group (268±64 vs 243±49dB/m,p<0.001). Prevalence of severe steatosis (CAP> 280dB/m) in subjects with risk factors was 43%. In multivariate analysis, fatty liver index (FLI) and HOMA were independent predictive factors of severe steatosis. There was a direct correlation between CAP and FLI values (r = 0.52,p<0.001). Interestingly, prevalence of increased LS was 12.6% in the risk group vs 0% in the control group (p<0.001). Increased LS occurred predominantly in subjects with high CAP values. CONCLUSIONS: A high proportion of subjects with metabolic risk factors seen in primary care have severe steatosis. FLI could be used as a surrogate of CAP. Increased LS was found in a significant proportion of subjects with risk factors but not in control subjects.
