Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 19, 2025
Voxel Printing Anatomy: Design and Fabrication of Realistic, Presurgical Planning Models through Bitmap Printing
Published on: February 9, 2022
Three-dimensional printing in medicine: a systematic review of pediatric applications
Caitlin A Francoisse1, Anne M Sescleifer1, Wilson T King2,3
1Division of Plastic Surgery, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Insights
Three-dimensional printing (3DP) in pediatrics offers solutions for unique challenges. This study categorizes 3DP applications into Teaching, Developing, Procedures, and Materials (TDPM) to enhance pediatric patient care.
Area of Science:
- Medical Engineering
- Pediatric Surgery
- Biotechnology
Background:
- Three-dimensional printing (3DP) uniquely addresses pediatric clinical challenges such as congenital anomalies, complex anatomy, high procedural risks, and patient growth.
- A hypothesis proposed that patient-specific 3DP applications in pediatrics could be systematically categorized.
Approach:
- A comprehensive literature search was conducted across major databases including PubMed, Scopus, Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science.
- 139 articles detailing 508 pediatric patients met the inclusion criteria for analysis.
Key Points:
- Four primary categories of patient-specific 3DP applications were identified: Teaching (9.3%), Developing intervention strategies (33.9%), Procedural applications (43.0%), and Material manufacturing (14.0%).
- Procedural applications encompassed contour models, guides, splints, and implants.
- Comparative studies indicated that 3DP devices were equivalent or superior to conventional methods, often reducing operating time and complications.
Conclusions:
- Patient-specific applications of Three-Dimensional Printing in Medicine (3DP) in pediatrics can be classified under the acronym TDPM: Teaching, Developing, Procedures, and Materials.
- This classification schema is crucial for fostering innovation and increasing the adoption of 3DP technologies to improve pediatric healthcare outcomes.
Background:
Three-dimensional printing (3DP) addresses distinct clinical challenges in pediatric care including: congenital variants, compact anatomy, high procedural risk, and growth over time. We hypothesized that patient-specific applications of 3DP in pediatrics could be categorized into concise, discrete categories of use.
Methods:
Terms related to "three-dimensional printing" and "pediatrics" were searched on PubMed, Scopus, Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science. Initial search yielded 2122 unique articles; 139 articles characterizing 508 patients met full inclusion criteria.
Results:
Four categories of patient-specific 3DP applications were identified: Teaching of families and medical staff (9.3%); Developing intervention strategies (33.9%); Procedural applications, including subtypes: contour models, guides, splints, and implants (43.0%); and Material manufacturing of shaping devices or prosthetics (14.0%). Procedural comparative studies found 3DP devices to be equivalent or better than conventional methods, with less operating time and fewer complications.
Conclusion:
Patient-specific applications of Three-Dimensional Printing in Medicine can be elegantly classified into four major categories: Teaching, Developing, Procedures, and Materials, sharing the same TDPM acronym. Understanding this schema is important because it promotes further innovation and increased implementation of these devices to improve pediatric care.
Impact:
This article classifies the pediatric applications of patient-specific three-dimensional printing. This is a first comprehensive review of patient-specific three-dimensional printing in both pediatric medical and surgical disciplines, incorporating previously described classification schema to create one unifying paradigm. Understanding these applications is important since three-dimensional printing addresses challenges that are uniquely pediatric including compact anatomy, unique congenital variants, greater procedural risk, and growth over time. We identified four classifications of patient-specific use: teaching, developing, procedural, and material uses. By classifying these applications, this review promotes understanding and incorporation of this expanding technology to improve the pediatric care.
