Three-dimensional analysis of donor masks for facial transplantation

Michael J. Cammarata, Nicole Wake, Rami S. Kantar, Margy Maroutsis, William J. Rifkin, Alexes Hazen, Lawrence E. Brecht, G. Leslie Bernstein, J. Rodrigo Diaz-Siso, Eduardo D. Rodriguez

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Face transplant teams have an ethical responsibility to restore the donor's likeness after allograft procurement. This has been achieved with masks constructed from facial impressions and three-dimensional printing. The authors compare the accuracy of conventional impression and three-dimensional printing technology. Methods: For three subjects, a three-dimensionally-printed mask was created using advanced three-dimensional imaging and PolyJet technology. Three silicone masks were made using an impression technique; a mold requiring direct contact with each subject's face was reinforced by plaster bands and filled with silicone. Digital models of the face and both masks of each subject were acquired with Vectra H1 Imaging or Artec scanners. Each digital mask model was overlaid onto its corresponding digital face model using a seven-landmark coregistration; part comparison was performed. The absolute deviation between each digital mask and digital face model was compared with the Mann-Whitney U test. Results: The absolute deviation (in millimeters) of each digitally printed mask model relative to the digital face model was significantly smaller than that of the digital silicone mask model (subject 1, 0.61 versus 1.29, p < 0.001; subject 2, 2.59 versus 2.87, p < 0.001; subject 3, 1.77 versus 4.20, p < 0.001). Mean cost and production times were $720 and 40.2 hours for three-dimensionally printed masks, and $735 and 11 hours for silicone masks. Conclusions: Surface analysis shows that three-dimensionally-printed masks offer greater surface accuracy than silicone masks. Greater donor resemblance without additional risk to the allograft may make three-dimensionally-printed masks the superior choice for face transplant teams.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1290E-1297E
JournalPlastic and reconstructive surgery
Volume143
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Facial Transplantation
Masks
Silicones
Allografts
Technology
Three-Dimensional Imaging

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Cammarata, M. J., Wake, N., Kantar, R. S., Maroutsis, M., Rifkin, W. J., Hazen, A., ... Rodriguez, E. D. (2019). Three-dimensional analysis of donor masks for facial transplantation. Plastic and reconstructive surgery, 143(6), 1290E-1297E. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000005671

Three-dimensional analysis of donor masks for facial transplantation. / Cammarata, Michael J.; Wake, Nicole; Kantar, Rami S.; Maroutsis, Margy; Rifkin, William J.; Hazen, Alexes; Brecht, Lawrence E.; Leslie Bernstein, G.; Rodrigo Diaz-Siso, J.; Rodriguez, Eduardo D.

In: Plastic and reconstructive surgery, Vol. 143, No. 6, 01.01.2019, p. 1290E-1297E.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Cammarata, MJ, Wake, N, Kantar, RS, Maroutsis, M, Rifkin, WJ, Hazen, A, Brecht, LE, Leslie Bernstein, G, Rodrigo Diaz-Siso, J & Rodriguez, ED 2019, 'Three-dimensional analysis of donor masks for facial transplantation', Plastic and reconstructive surgery, vol. 143, no. 6, pp. 1290E-1297E. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000005671
Cammarata, Michael J. ; Wake, Nicole ; Kantar, Rami S. ; Maroutsis, Margy ; Rifkin, William J. ; Hazen, Alexes ; Brecht, Lawrence E. ; Leslie Bernstein, G. ; Rodrigo Diaz-Siso, J. ; Rodriguez, Eduardo D. / Three-dimensional analysis of donor masks for facial transplantation. In: Plastic and reconstructive surgery. 2019 ; Vol. 143, No. 6. pp. 1290E-1297E.
@article{3cbee05b6cde4748a2d0a611c4950184,
title = "Three-dimensional analysis of donor masks for facial transplantation",
abstract = "Background: Face transplant teams have an ethical responsibility to restore the donor's likeness after allograft procurement. This has been achieved with masks constructed from facial impressions and three-dimensional printing. The authors compare the accuracy of conventional impression and three-dimensional printing technology. Methods: For three subjects, a three-dimensionally-printed mask was created using advanced three-dimensional imaging and PolyJet technology. Three silicone masks were made using an impression technique; a mold requiring direct contact with each subject's face was reinforced by plaster bands and filled with silicone. Digital models of the face and both masks of each subject were acquired with Vectra H1 Imaging or Artec scanners. Each digital mask model was overlaid onto its corresponding digital face model using a seven-landmark coregistration; part comparison was performed. The absolute deviation between each digital mask and digital face model was compared with the Mann-Whitney U test. Results: The absolute deviation (in millimeters) of each digitally printed mask model relative to the digital face model was significantly smaller than that of the digital silicone mask model (subject 1, 0.61 versus 1.29, p < 0.001; subject 2, 2.59 versus 2.87, p < 0.001; subject 3, 1.77 versus 4.20, p < 0.001). Mean cost and production times were $720 and 40.2 hours for three-dimensionally printed masks, and $735 and 11 hours for silicone masks. Conclusions: Surface analysis shows that three-dimensionally-printed masks offer greater surface accuracy than silicone masks. Greater donor resemblance without additional risk to the allograft may make three-dimensionally-printed masks the superior choice for face transplant teams.",
author = "Cammarata, {Michael J.} and Nicole Wake and Kantar, {Rami S.} and Margy Maroutsis and Rifkin, {William J.} and Alexes Hazen and Brecht, {Lawrence E.} and {Leslie Bernstein}, G. and {Rodrigo Diaz-Siso}, J. and Rodriguez, {Eduardo D.}",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/PRS.0000000000005671",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "143",
pages = "1290E--1297E",
journal = "Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery",
issn = "0032-1052",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Three-dimensional analysis of donor masks for facial transplantation

AU - Cammarata, Michael J.

AU - Wake, Nicole

AU - Kantar, Rami S.

AU - Maroutsis, Margy

AU - Rifkin, William J.

AU - Hazen, Alexes

AU - Brecht, Lawrence E.

AU - Leslie Bernstein, G.

AU - Rodrigo Diaz-Siso, J.

AU - Rodriguez, Eduardo D.

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Background: Face transplant teams have an ethical responsibility to restore the donor's likeness after allograft procurement. This has been achieved with masks constructed from facial impressions and three-dimensional printing. The authors compare the accuracy of conventional impression and three-dimensional printing technology. Methods: For three subjects, a three-dimensionally-printed mask was created using advanced three-dimensional imaging and PolyJet technology. Three silicone masks were made using an impression technique; a mold requiring direct contact with each subject's face was reinforced by plaster bands and filled with silicone. Digital models of the face and both masks of each subject were acquired with Vectra H1 Imaging or Artec scanners. Each digital mask model was overlaid onto its corresponding digital face model using a seven-landmark coregistration; part comparison was performed. The absolute deviation between each digital mask and digital face model was compared with the Mann-Whitney U test. Results: The absolute deviation (in millimeters) of each digitally printed mask model relative to the digital face model was significantly smaller than that of the digital silicone mask model (subject 1, 0.61 versus 1.29, p < 0.001; subject 2, 2.59 versus 2.87, p < 0.001; subject 3, 1.77 versus 4.20, p < 0.001). Mean cost and production times were $720 and 40.2 hours for three-dimensionally printed masks, and $735 and 11 hours for silicone masks. Conclusions: Surface analysis shows that three-dimensionally-printed masks offer greater surface accuracy than silicone masks. Greater donor resemblance without additional risk to the allograft may make three-dimensionally-printed masks the superior choice for face transplant teams.

AB - Background: Face transplant teams have an ethical responsibility to restore the donor's likeness after allograft procurement. This has been achieved with masks constructed from facial impressions and three-dimensional printing. The authors compare the accuracy of conventional impression and three-dimensional printing technology. Methods: For three subjects, a three-dimensionally-printed mask was created using advanced three-dimensional imaging and PolyJet technology. Three silicone masks were made using an impression technique; a mold requiring direct contact with each subject's face was reinforced by plaster bands and filled with silicone. Digital models of the face and both masks of each subject were acquired with Vectra H1 Imaging or Artec scanners. Each digital mask model was overlaid onto its corresponding digital face model using a seven-landmark coregistration; part comparison was performed. The absolute deviation between each digital mask and digital face model was compared with the Mann-Whitney U test. Results: The absolute deviation (in millimeters) of each digitally printed mask model relative to the digital face model was significantly smaller than that of the digital silicone mask model (subject 1, 0.61 versus 1.29, p < 0.001; subject 2, 2.59 versus 2.87, p < 0.001; subject 3, 1.77 versus 4.20, p < 0.001). Mean cost and production times were $720 and 40.2 hours for three-dimensionally printed masks, and $735 and 11 hours for silicone masks. Conclusions: Surface analysis shows that three-dimensionally-printed masks offer greater surface accuracy than silicone masks. Greater donor resemblance without additional risk to the allograft may make three-dimensionally-printed masks the superior choice for face transplant teams.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85067266259&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85067266259&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/PRS.0000000000005671

DO - 10.1097/PRS.0000000000005671

M3 - Article

C2 - 30907812

AN - SCOPUS:85067266259

VL - 143

SP - 1290E-1297E

JO - Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

JF - Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

SN - 0032-1052

IS - 6

ER -