A Practical Guide to Image Processing in the Creation of 3D Models for Orthopedics

Advancements and applications of 3D printing in pediatric orthopedics: A comprehensive review

Preoperative planning is crucial for successful surgical outcomes. 3D printing technology has revolutionized surgical planning by enabling the creation and manufacturing of patient-specific models and instruments. This review explores the applications of 3D printing in pediatric orthopedics, focusing on image acquisition, segmentation, 3D model creation, and printing techniques within specific applications, including pediatric limb deformities, pediatric orthopedic oncology, and pediatric spinal deformities. 3D printing simultaneously enhances surgical precision while reducing operative time, reduces complications, and improves patient outcomes in various pediatric orthopedic conditions. 3D printing is a transformative technology in pediatric orthopedics, offering significant advantages in preoperative planning, surgical execution, and postoperative care.

Automatic identification of radius and ulna bone landmarks on 3D virtual models

BACKGROUND

For bone morphology and biomechanics analysis, landmarks are essential to define position, orientation, and shape. These landmarks define bone and joint coordinate systems and are widely used in these research fields. Currently, no method is known for automatically identifying landmarks on virtual 3D bone models of the radius and ulna. This paper proposes a knowledge-based method for locating landmarks and calculating a coordinate system for the radius, ulna, and combined forearm bones, which is essential for measuring forearm function. This method does not rely on pre-labeled data.

VALIDATION

The algorithm is validated by comparing the landmarks placed by the algorithm with the mean position of landmarks placed by a group of experts on cadaveric specimens regarding distance and orientation.

RESULTS

The median Euclidean distance differences between all the automated and reference landmarks range from 0.4 to 1.8 millimeters. The median angular differences of the coordinate system of the radius and ulna range from -1.4 to 0.6 degrees. The forearm coordinate system's median errors range from -0.2 to 2.0 degrees. The median error in calculating the rotational position of the radius relative to the ulna is 1.8 degrees.

CONCLUSION

The automatic method's applicability depends on the use context and desired accuracy. However, the current method is a validated first step in the automatic analysis of the three-dimensional forearm anatomy.

Indications for Nonbiological Reconstruction of Posttraumatic Bone Defects About the Knee

SUMMARY

3D printing and modeling has continued to grow in popularity over the past decade because the technology has matured and become more affordable and widely available. The main indications for nonbiological reconstruction of large bone defects are principally those patients where the candidate is unlikely to be successful if reconstructed by other means. Bespoke, custom, patient-specific implants can be designed to very effectively address bone loss, incorporating design elements that are particular to the needs of any given unique clinical condition. These implants are generally designed as titanium scaffolds that encourage bony incorporation at the host implant junction both proximal and distal. These scaffolds are typically considered a cellular solid, with high porosity that also promotes bone ingrowth directly into the substance of the body of the implant. Titanium scaffolds of this type have become a useful treatment alternative for large segmental bone defects around the knee, especially distal femoral defects. These are often adult patients with local or systemic compromise, or instead they may be too young to be considered candidates for reconstruction using a megaprosthesis. The process requires careful evaluation of individual patients, then matching that patient with the best treatment option, while recognizing the expectations and demands specific to that particular patient. Several cases are presented here to illustrate the variety of indications that can be successfully addressed with this technology, highlighting the quality of the clinical outcome that can be achieved despite the complexity of the pathology encountered.

Technical improvements in preparing 3D printed anatomical models for comminuted fracture preoperative planning

Preoperative planning of comminuted fracture repair using 3D printed anatomical models is enabling surgeons to visualize and simulate the fracture reduction processes before surgery. However, the preparation of such models can be challenging due to the complexity of certain fractures, particularly in preserving fine detail in bone fragments, maintaining the positioning of displaced fragments, and accurate positioning of multiple bones. This study described several key technical considerations for preparing 3D printed anatomical models for comminuted fracture preoperative planning. An optimized segmentation protocol was developed that preserves fine detail in bone fragments, resulting in a more accurate representation of the fracture. Additionally, struts were manually added to the digital model to maintain the positioning of displaced fragments after fabrication, reducing the likelihood of errors during printing or misrepresentation of fragment positioning. Magnets were also used to enable separation and visualization of accurate positioning of multiple bones, making it easier to visualize fracture components otherwise obscured by the anatomy. Finally, the infill for non-target structures was adjusted to minimize print time and material wastage. These technical optimizations improved the accuracy and efficiency of preparing 3D printed anatomical models for comminuted fracture preoperative planning, improving opportunities for surgeons to better plan surgical treatment in advance, reducing the likelihood of errors, with the goal of improving surgical outcomes.

The Concept of Scaffold-Guided Bone Regeneration for the Treatment of Long Bone Defects: Current Clinical Application and Future Perspective

The treatment of bone defects remains a challenging clinical problem with high reintervention rates, morbidity, and resulting significant healthcare costs. Surgical techniques are constantly evolving, but outcomes can be influenced by several parameters, including the patient's age, comorbidities, systemic disorders, the anatomical location of the defect, and the surgeon's preference and experience. The most used therapeutic modalities for the regeneration of long bone defects include distraction osteogenesis (bone transport), free vascularized fibular grafts, the Masquelet technique, allograft, and (arthroplasty with) mega-prostheses. Over the past 25 years, three-dimensional (3D) printing, a breakthrough layer-by-layer manufacturing technology that produces final parts directly from 3D model data, has taken off and transformed the treatment of bone defects by enabling personalized therapies with highly porous 3D-printed implants tailored to the patient. Therefore, to reduce the morbidities and complications associated with current treatment regimens, efforts have been made in translational research toward 3D-printed scaffolds to facilitate bone regeneration. Three-dimensional printed scaffolds should not only provide osteoconductive surfaces for cell attachment and subsequent bone formation but also provide physical support and containment of bone graft material during the regeneration process, enhancing bone ingrowth, while simultaneously, orthopaedic implants supply mechanical strength with rigid, stable external and/or internal fixation. In this perspective review, we focus on elaborating on the history of bone defect treatment methods and assessing current treatment approaches as well as recent developments, including existing evidence on the advantages and disadvantages of 3D-printed scaffolds for bone defect regeneration. Furthermore, it is evident that the regulatory framework and organization and financing of evidence-based clinical trials remains very complex, and new challenges for non-biodegradable and biodegradable 3D-printed scaffolds for bone regeneration are emerging that have not yet been sufficiently addressed, such as guideline development for specific surgical indications, clinically feasible design concepts for needed multicentre international preclinical and clinical trials, the current medico-legal status, and reimbursement. These challenges underscore the need for intensive exchange and open and honest debate among leaders in the field. This goal can be addressed in a well-planned and focused stakeholder workshop on the topic of patient-specific 3D-printed scaffolds for long bone defect regeneration, as proposed in this perspective review.

Comparison of 2 open-sourced 3-dimensional modeling techniques for orthopaedic application

Objectives: Although 3-dimensional (3D) printing is becoming more widely adopted for clinical applications, it is yet to be accepted as part of standard practice. One of the key applications of this technology is orthopaedic surgical planning for urgent trauma cases. Anatomically accurate replicas of patients' fracture models can be produced to guide intervention. These high-quality models facilitate the design and printing of patient-specific implants and surgical devices. Therefore, a fast and accurate workflow will help orthopaedic surgeons to generate high-quality 3D printable models of complex fractures. Currently, there is a lack of access to an uncomplicated and inexpensive workflow. Methods: Using patient DICOM data sets (n = 13), we devised a novel, simple, open-source, and rapid modeling process using Drishti software and compared its efficacy and data storage with the 3D Slicer image computing platform. We imported the computed tomography image directory acquired from patients into the software to isolate the model of bone surface from surrounding soft tissue using the minimum functions. One pelvic fracture case was further integrated into the customized implant design practice to demonstrate the compatibility of the 3D models generated from Drishti. Results: The data sizes of the generated 3D models and the processing files that represent the original DICOM of Drishti are on average 27% and 12% smaller than that of 3D Slicer, respectively (both P < 0.05). The time frame needed to reach the stage of viewing the 3D bone model and the exporting of the data of Drishti is 39% and 38% faster than that of 3D Slicer, respectively (both P < 0.05). We also constructed a virtual model using third-party software to trial the implant design. Conclusions: Drishti is more suitable for urgent trauma cases that require fast and efficient 3D bone reconstruction with less hardware requirement. 3D Slicer performs better at quantitative preoperative planning and multilayer segmentation. Both software platforms are compatible with third-party programs used to produce customized implants that could be useful for surgical training. Level of Evidence: Level V.

Virtual surgical planning and 3D printing: Methodology and applications in veterinary oromaxillofacial surgery

Virtual surgical planning is the process of planning and rehearsing a surgical procedure completely within the virtual environment on computer models. Virtual surgical planning and 3D printing is gaining popularity in veterinary oromaxillofacial surgery and are viable tools for the most basic to the most complex cases. These techniques can provide the surgeon with improved visualization and, thus, understanding of the patients' 3D anatomy. Virtual surgical planning is feasible in a clinical setting and may decrease surgical time and increase surgical accuracy. For example, pre-operative implant contouring on a 3D-printed model can save time during surgery; 3D-printed patient-specific implants and surgical guides help maintain normocclusion after mandibular reconstruction; and the presence of a haptic model in the operating room can improve surgical precision and safety. However, significant time and financial resources may need to be allocated for planning and production of surgical guides and implants. The objectives of this manuscript are to provide a description of the methods involved in virtual surgical planning and 3D printing as they apply to veterinary oromaxillofacial surgery and to highlight these concepts with the strategic use of examples. In addition, the advantages and disadvantages of the methods as well as the required software and equipment will be discussed.

Accuracy of virtual surgical planning and custom three-dimensionally printed osteotomy and reduction guides for acute uni- and biapical correction of antebrachial deformities in dogs

OBJECTIVE

To report clinical experience using virtual surgical planning (VSP) and surgical application of 3D printed custom surgical guides to facilitate uni- and biapical correction of antebrachial deformities in dogs.

ANIMALS

11 dogs (13 antebrachial deformity corrections).

PROCEDURES

Using CT-based bone models, VSP was performed, and surgical guides were designed and 3D printed. The guides were used to execute osteotomies and align bone segments. Postoperative CTs were obtained to compare limb alignment with the VSP. Long-term assessment of lameness and cosmesis were compared with preoperative status.

RESULTS

Guides were successfully utilized and postoperative analysis was available for 10 of 13 deformities. Guides were abandoned in 2 deformities due to soft tissue tension. Evaluation of postoperative frontal, sagittal, axial, and translational limb alignment revealed that over 90% of parameters were within the acceptable range of ≤ 5° angulation and rotation or ≤ 5 mm of translation from the VSP. Lameness scores were improved in 7/8 deformities with associated preoperative lameness, and posture was improved in 10/10 deformities in which guides were deployed. Complications included reduced range of carpal motion (n = 2), implant sensitivity (n = 2), fracture (n = 1), and tendon laceration (n = 1).

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

VSP and customized surgical guide application facilitated accurate antebrachial limb deformity correction in the majority of deformities in this case series. The use of VSP and 3D printed guides would appear to be a viable and accurate approach for correction of both uni- and biapical antebrachial deformities in dogs.

Three-Dimensional Quantification of Glenoid Bone Loss in Anterior Shoulder Instability: The Anatomic Concave Surface Area Method

Background

Recurrent shoulder instability may be associated with glenoid erosion and bone loss. Accurate quantification of bone loss significantly influences the contemplation of surgical procedure. In addition, assessment of bone loss is crucial for surgical planning and accurate graft placement during surgery.

Purpose

To quantify the concave surface area of glenoid bone loss by using 3-dimensional (3D) segmented models of the scapula and to compare this method with the best-fit circle and glenoid height/width methods, which use the glenoid rim for bone loss estimations.

Study Design

Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2.

Methods

A total of 36 consecutive preoperative bilateral computed tomography scans of patients eligible for a primary Latarjet procedure were selected from our institutional surgical database (mean patient age, 29 ± 9 years; 31 men and 5 women). The 3D models of both scapulae were generated using medical segmentation software and were used to map the anatomic concave surface area (ACSA) of the inferior glenoid using the diameter of the best-fit circle of the healthy glenoid. Bone loss was calculated as a ratio of the difference between surface areas of both glenoids (healthy and pathological) against the anatomic circular surface area of the healthy glenoid (the ACSA method). These results were compared with bone loss calculations using the best-fit circle and glenoid height/width methods. Inter- and intraobserver reliability were also calculated.

Results

The mean (± SD) bone loss calculated using the ACSA, the best-fit circle, and glenoid height/width methods was 9.4% ± 6.7%, 14.3% ± 6.8%, and 17.6% ± 7.3%, respectively. The ACSA method showed excellent interobserver reliability, with an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.95 versus those for the best-fit circle (ICC, 0.71) and glenoid height/width (ICC, 0.79) methods.

Conclusion

Quantification of instability-related glenoid bone loss is reliable using the 3D ACSA method.

Quantitative fit analysis of acromion fracture plating systems using three-dimensional reconstructed scapula fractures - A multi-observer study

INTRODUCTION

Surgical treatment of displaced acromial and scapula spine fractures may be challenging due to the bony anatomy and variable fracture patterns. This difficulty is accentuated by the limitations of the available scapular plates for fracture fixation. This study compares the quantitative fitting of anatomic scapular plates and clavicle plates, using three-dimensional (3D) printed fractured scapulae.

METHODS

Fourteen scapulae with acromion and spine fractures were used for this study. Computerized tomographic (CT) scans of the fractured scapulae were obtained from the Philips picture archiving and communication system (PACS) database of patients admitted to a tertiary teaching hospital in Cape Town, South Africa between 2012 and 2016. The reconstructed scapulae were 3D printed and the anatomical acromion and clavicle plates were templated about the fracture regions. The fit assessment was performed by five observers who classified the plates as no-fit, intermediate fit, and anatomical fit according to the surgical guidelines.

RESULTS

The 6-hole anterior clavicle plate performed better than any of the scapular plates as they were able to fit 45.7% of the fractured acromion, including the spine. Among the pre-contoured anatomical scapula plates, both the short and the long acromion plates could fit only 27.3% of the fractured acromion. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.965 suggesting excellent consensus among the five observers.

CONCLUSION

Clavicle plates were found to be better suited to fit around a scapula fracture in its acromion and spine region.

Point-of-care manufacturing: a single university hospital's initial experience

Background

The integration of 3D printing technology in hospitals is evolving toward production models such as point-of-care manufacturing. This study aims to present the results of the integration of 3D printing technology in a manufacturing university hospital.

Methods

Observational, descriptive, retrospective, and monocentric study of 907 instances of 3D printing from November 2015 to March 2020. Variables such as product type, utility, time, or manufacturing materials were analyzed.

Results

Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, and Gynecology and Obstetrics are the medical specialties that have manufactured the largest number of processes. Working and printing time, as well as the amount of printing material, is different for different types of products and input data. The most common printing material was polylactic acid, although biocompatible resin was introduced to produce surgical guides. In addition, the hospital has worked on the co-design of custom-made implants with manufacturing companies and has also participated in tissue bio-printing projects.

Conclusions

The integration of 3D printing in a university hospital allows identifying the conceptual evolution to “point-of-care manufacturing.”

Conceptual evolution of 3D printing in orthopedic surgery and traumatology: from "do it yourself" to "point of care manufacturing"

BACKGROUND

3D printing technology in hospitals facilitates production models such as point-of-care manufacturing. Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology is the specialty that can most benefit from the advantages of these tools. The purpose of this study is to present the results of the integration of 3D printing technology in a Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology and to identify the productive model of the point-of-care manufacturing as a paradigm of personalized medicine.

METHODS

Observational, descriptive, retrospective and monocentric study of a total of 623 additive manufacturing processes carried out in a Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology from November 2015 to March 2020. Variables such as product type, utility, time or materials for manufacture were analyzed.

RESULTS

The areas of expertise that have performed more processes are Traumatology, Reconstructive and Orthopedic Oncology. Pre-operative planning is their primary use. Working and 3D printing hours, as well as the amount of 3D printing material used, vary according to the type of product or material delivered to perform the process. The most commonly used 3D printing material for manufacturing is polylactic acid, although biocompatible resin has been used to produce surgical guides. In addition, the hospital has worked on the co-design of customized implants with manufacturing companies.

CONCLUSIONS

The integration of 3D printing in a Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology allows identifying the conceptual evolution from "Do-It-Yourself" to "POC manufacturing".

Computed tomographic evaluation of glenoid joint line restoration with glenoid bone grafting and reverse shoulder arthroplasty in patients with significant glenoid bone loss

BACKGROUND

Restoration of native glenohumeral joint line is important for a successful outcome after reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). The aims of this study were to quantify the restoration of glenoid joint line after structural bone grafting and RSA, and to evaluate graft incorporation, correction of glenoid version, and rate of notching.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of 21 patients who underwent RSA (20 primary, 1 revision) with glenoid bone grafting (15 autografts, 6 allografts). Grammont design implants and baseplate with long peg were used in all patients. Preoperative and postoperative 3D models were created using MIMICS 21.0. Preoperative defects were classified, and postoperative joint line restoration was assessed based on the lateral aspect of the base of the coracoid. Postoperative computed tomographic (CT) scans were evaluated for graft incorporation, version correction, and presence of notching.

RESULTS

Preoperative glenoid defects were classified as massive (5%), large (29%), moderate (52%), and small (14%). The average preoperative version was 8° of retroversion. The average postoperative version was 5° of retroversion. The average preoperative medialization was noted to be 8.4 mm medial to native joint line or 0.6 mm (range -16.8 to 13.2) lateral to the coracoid base. The postoperative CT scans demonstrated a mean joint line at 12.1 mm (range 1.3-22.4) lateral to the coracoid base. At the 3-month follow-up, all patients demonstrated graft incorporation on CT scans. Graft osteolysis was observed on CT scan in 4.8% of patients at a mean follow-up of 19.5 months.

DISCUSSION

Structural bone grafting of glenoid defect effectively re-creates the glenoid anatomy, restores glenoid bone stock, re-creates the true glenohumeral joint line, and corrects glenoid deformity. The use of bone grafting also allows lateralization of the baseplate and glenosphere, reducing the risk of severe scapular notching.

CONCLUSION

Restoration of the glenoid joint line was achieved in all patients. Glenoid bone grafting is a viable option for restoring glenoid joint line in cases of significant glenoid defects encountered during RSA.

Role of the orthopaedic surgeon in 3D printing: current applications and legal issues for a personalized medicine

3D printing (I3D) is an additive manufacturing technology with a growing interest in medicine and especially in the specialty of orthopaedic surgery and traumatology. There are numerous applications that add value to the personalised treatment of patients: advanced preoperative planning, surgeries with specific tools for each patient, customised orthotic treatments, personalised implants or prostheses and innovative development in the field of bone and cartilage tissue engineering. This paper provides an update on the role that the orthopaedic surgeon and traumatologist plays as a user and prescriber of this technology and a review of the stages required for the correct integration of I3D into the hospital care flow, from the necessary resources to the current legal recommendations.

Setting Up 3D Printing Services for Orthopaedic Applications: A Step-by-Step Guide and an Overview of 3DBioSphere

INTRODUCTION

3D printing has widespread applications in orthopaedics including creating biomodels, patient-specific instruments, implants, and developing bioprints. 3DGraphy or printing 3D models enable the surgeon to understand, plan, and simulate different procedures on it. Despite widespread applications in non-healthcare specialties, it has failed to gain traction in healthcare settings. This is perhaps due to perceived capital expenditure cost and the lack of knowledge and skill required to execute the process.

PURPOSE

This article is written with an aim to provide step-by-step instructions for setting up a cost-efficient 3D printing laboratory in an institution or standalone radiology centre. The article with the help of video modules will explain the key process of segmentation, especially the technique of edge detection and thresholding which are the heart of 3D printing.

CONCLUSION

This is likely to enable the practising orthopaedician and radiologist to set up a 3D printing unit in their departments or even standalone radiology centres at minimal startup costs. This will enable maximal utilisation of this technology that is likely to bring about a paradigm shift in planning, simulation, and execution of complex surgeries.

Preliminary results using patient-specific 3d printed models to improve preoperative planning for correction of post-traumatic tibial deformities with circular frames

BACKGROUND

Preoperative planning for circular external fixators is considered vital towards achieving the best results for complex post-traumatic tibial deformities, and patient-specific 3D printed (3DP) models were used here as a planning aid. The main goal was to investigate the fidelity of the preoperative planning process, by assessing the potential to reduce operative time and determining the need to adjust pre-constructed frames intra-operatively.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Nine patients (10 limbs) underwent treatment for post-traumatic tibial complications using circular external fixation. These were compared to 10 similar cases where a 3DPM was not used as a pre-operative planning aide (Control group). Patient-specific models of affected bones were printed, and preoperative planning was performed using conventional techniques and Hexapod-assisted software. Detailed planning in a virtual procedure determined osteotomy levels and identified sites for wires and half-pins. The prototype of the external fixator was locked in this optimized configuration, removed from the model, and sterilized prior to the actual procedure.

RESULTS

Nine patients with 10 limbs were treated for complications following tibial fractures. Seven were infected non-unions, and three cases were malunions. For all cases a CT based 3DP model of the full tibia was used in the preoperative planning stage. Image analysis required a mean of 1.7 h, with an average of 14.9 h to 3D print each model. In the control group (without a 3D model), the mean surgical time was 329 min (180-680). The mean surgical time in the 3DPM group was only 172.4 min (72-240), (p = 0.024), reducing the surgery time by 48%. For the 3DPM group it was not necessary to modify the preassembled frame in any case, while in the Control group, the pre-constructed frame required intra-operative modifications in 8 of the 10 cases (p = 0.0007).

CONCLUSION

Using patient-specific 3D models has allowed us to carry out meticulous preoperative planning sessions, eliminating the need to modify or alter the frame assembly in the operating room, saving substantial surgical time and enabling a more precise design of the apparatus. This was especially useful in multiplanar deformities and for the spatial configuration of the foot support, talus ring, and ankle ring.

A paradigm shift in surgical planning and simulation using 3Dgraphy: Experience of first 50 surgeries done using 3D-printed biomodels

INTRODUCTION

Preoperative planning is an important aspect of any orthopedic surgery. Traditionally, surgeons mentally rehearse the operation and anticipate problems based on data available from "radiography" like MRI and CT. 3D printed bio-models and tools, or "3Dgraphy" can simplify this mental exercise and provide a realistic and user-friendly portrayal of this radiographic data.

METHODS

Five surgeons participated in this multicenter study. 3D printed biomodels were obtained for 50 surgical cases that included periarticular trauma (24), pelvic trauma (11), complex primary (7), and revision arthroplasty (8). CT scan data was used to generate computer models which were then 3D printed in real size. These models were used to understand pathoanatomy and conduct simulated surgery as a part of preoperative planning. The models were sterilized and were used for intraoperative referencing. Following each case, the operating surgeon was asked to fill out a structured questionnaire to report on the perceived benefits of these tools.

RESULTS

All surgeons reported that the biomodels provided additional information to conventional imaging that enhanced their knowledge of the complex pathoanatomy. It was useful in preoperative planning, rehearsing the operation, surgical simulation, intraoperative referencing, surgical navigation, preoperative implant selection, and inventory management. This probably reduced surgical time and improved accuracy of the surgery. All surgeons reported that they would not only use it themselves but also recommend it to other surgeons.

CONCLUSION

3Dgraphy was found to be a valuable tool in orthopedic surgeries that involve complex pathoanatomy like pelvic trauma, revision arthroplasty, and periarticular fracture. As the technology evolves and improves, they are likely to become a standard component of many orthopedic procedures.

Putting 3D modelling and 3D printing into practice: virtual surgery and preoperative planning to reconstruct complex post-traumatic skeletal deformities and defects

3D printing technology has revolutionized and gradually transformed manufacturing across a broad spectrum of industries, including healthcare. Nowhere is this more apparent than in orthopaedics with many surgeons already incorporating aspects of 3D modelling and virtual procedures into their routine clinical practice. As a more extreme application, patient-specific 3D printed titanium truss cages represent a novel approach for managing the challenge of segmental bone defects. This review illustrates the potential indications of this innovative technique using 3D printed titanium truss cages in conjunction with the Masquelet technique. These implants are custom designed during a virtual surgical planning session with the combined input of an orthopaedic surgeon, an orthopaedic engineering professional and a biomedical design engineer. The ability to 3D model an identical replica of the original intact bone in a virtual procedure is of vital importance when attempting to precisely reconstruct normal anatomy during the actual procedure. Additionally, other important factors must be considered during the planning procedure, such as the three-dimensional configuration of the implant. Meticulous design is necessary to allow for successful implantation through the planned surgical exposure, while being aware of the constraints imposed by local anatomy and prior implants. This review will attempt to synthesize the current state of the art as well as discuss our personal experience using this promising technique. It will address implant design considerations including the mechanical, anatomical and functional aspects unique to each case.