Preliminary Study on the Accuracy Comparison Between 3D-Printed Bone Models and Naked-Eye Stereoscopy-Based Virtual Reality Models for Presurgical Molding in Orbital Floor Fracture Repair
Source abstract
Abstract
Three-dimensional (3D) printing enables accurate implant pre-shaping in orbital reconstruction but is costly and time-consuming. Naked-eye stereoscopic displays (NEDs) enable virtual implant modeling without fabrication. This study aimed to compare the reproducibility and accuracy of NED-based virtual reality (VR) pre-shaping with conventional 3D-printed models. Two surgeons pre-shaped implants for 11 unilateral orbital floor fractures using both 3D-printed and NED-based VR models with identical computed tomography data. The depth, area, and axis dimensions were measured, and reproducibility and agreement were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), Bland–Altman analysis, and shape similarity metrics—Hausdorff distance (HD) and root mean square error (RMSE). Intra-rater ICCs were ≥0.80 for all parameters except depth in the VR model. The HD and RMSE reveal no significant differences between 3D (2.64 ± 0.85 mm; 1.02 ± 0.42 mm) and VR (3.14 ± 1.18 mm; 1.24 ± 0.53 mm). Inter-rater ICCs were ≥0.80 for the area and axes in both modalities, while depth remained low. Between modalities, no significant differences were found; HD and RMSE were 2.95 ± 0.94 mm and 1.28 ± 0.49 mm. The NED-based VR pre-shaping achieved reproducibility and dimensional agreement comparable to 3D printing, suggesting a feasible cost- and time-efficient alternative for orbital reconstruction. These preliminary findings suggest that NED-based preshaping may be feasible; however, larger studies are required to confirm whether VR can achieve performance comparable to 3D-printed models.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Facial Trauma and Fracture Management · Ocular Disorders and Treatments · Traumatic Ocular and Foreign Body Injuries
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, National Defense Medical College, Saitama 359-8513, Japan
Funding
Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research
References (32)
Show source-provided references
1. Endoscopic Endonasal Orbital Floor Fracture Repair With Mucosal Preservation to Reinforce the Fractured Bone10.1097/SCS.0000000000006849 ↗
2. Ocular motility and diplopia measurements following orbital floor fracture repair10.1016/j.amjoto.2020.102879 ↗
3. Pressure Onto the Orbital Walls and Orbital Morphology in Orbital Floor or Medial Wall Fracture: A 3-Dimensional Printer Study10.1097/SCS.0000000000009565 ↗
4. Orbital Remodeling and 3-dimensional Printing in Delayed Orbital Floor Fracture Reconstructions10.1097/GOX.0000000000006772 ↗
5. Re-evaluating the Timing of Surgery after Isolated Orbital Floor Fracture
6. Assessment of a Consecutive Series of Orbital Floor Fracture Repairs With the Hess Area Ratio and the Use of Unsintered Hydroxyapatite Particles/Poly l-Lactide Composite Sheets for Orbital Fracture Reconstruction10.1016/j.joms.2020.09.019 ↗
7. Treatment with individual orbital wall implants in humans-1-Year ophthalmologic evaluation10.1016/j.jcms.2010.03.007 ↗
8. Classical versus custom orbital wall reconstruction: Selected factors regarding surgery and hospitalization10.1016/j.jcms.2017.02.008 ↗
9. Is there more to the clinical outcome in posttraumatic reconstruction of the inferior and medial orbital walls than accuracy of implant placement and implant surface contouring? A prospective multicenter study to identify predictors of clinical outcome10.1016/j.jcms.2018.01.007 ↗
10. Cost Analysis for In-house versus Industry-printed Skull Models for Acute Midfacial Fractures
11. Intraoperative Evaluation of Body Surface Improvement by an Augmented Reality System That a Clinician Can Modify
12. Virtual and Augmented Reality Applications in Medicine: Analysis of the Scientific Literature10.2196/25499 ↗
13. Spine Surgery Supported by Augmented Reality10.1177/2192568219868217 ↗
14. How to Build a Patient-Specific Hybrid Simulator for Orthopaedic Open Surgery: Benefits and Limits of Mixed-Reality Using the Microsoft HoloLens10.1155/2018/5435097 ↗
15. When virtual and real worlds coexist: Visualization and visual system affect spatial performance in augmented reality10.1167/jov.21.8.17 ↗
16. (2025, October 13). Eye-Sensing Light Field Display. Available online: https://www.sony.com/en/SonyInfo/technology/stories/LFD/.
17. Ariwa, M., Itamiya, T., Koizumi, S., and Yamaguchi, T. (2021). Comparison of the Observation Errors of Augmented and Spatial Reality Systems. Appl. Sci., 11.10.3390/app112412076 ↗
18. Tomita, R., Nakano, A., Kawanishi, N., Hoshi, N., Itamiya, T., and Kimoto, K. (2024). Abutment Tooth Formation Simulator for Naked-Eye Stereoscopy. Appl. Sci., 14.10.3390/app14188367 ↗
19. Tsukuda, T., Mutoh, N., Nakano, A., Itamiya, T., and Tani-Ishii, N. (2023). Study of Root Canal Length Estimations by 3D Spatial Reproduction with Stereoscopic Vision. Appl. Sci., 13.10.3390/app13158651 ↗
20. Dubron, K., Verbist, M., Jacobs, R., Olszewski, R., Shaheen, E., and Willaert, R. (2023). Augmented and Virtual Reality for Preoperative Trauma Planning, Focusing on Orbital Reconstructions: A Systematic Review. J. Clin. Med., 12.10.3390/jcm12165203 ↗
21. Mixed Reality in the Reconstruction of Orbital Floor: An Experimental and Clinical Evaluative Study10.4103/ams.ams_141_21 ↗
22. Orbital form analysis: Problems with design and positioning of precontoured orbital implants: A serial study using post-processed clinical CT data in unaffected orbits10.1016/j.ijom.2010.03.005 ↗
23. Patient-Specific Orbital Implants: Development and Implementation of Technology for More Accurate Orbital Reconstruction10.1097/SCS.0000000000002080 ↗
24. Grasping lacks depth constancy in both virtual and real environments10.1167/15.12.1147 ↗
25. An effective visualization technique for depth perception in augmented reality-based surgical navigation10.1002/rcs.1657 ↗
26. Reconstruction using ‘triangular approximation’ of bone grafts for orbital blowout fractures10.1016/j.jcms.2015.07.002 ↗
27. The use of anatomically drop-shaped bioactive glass S53P4 implants in the reconstruction of orbital floor fractures—A prospective long-term follow-up study10.1016/j.jcms.2015.03.029 ↗
28. Soft tissue coverage on the segmentation accuracy of the 3D surface-rendered model from cone-beam CT10.1007/s00784-016-1844-x ↗
29. Consorti, G., Monarchi, G., and Catarzi, L. (2024). Presurgical Virtual Planning and Intraoperative Navigation with 3D-Preformed Mesh: A New Protocol for Primary Orbital Fracture Reconstruction. Life, 14.10.3390/life14040482 ↗
30. Accuracy of surgical navigation for patient-specific reconstructions of orbital fractures: A systematic review and meta-analysis10.1016/j.jormas.2023.101683 ↗
31. A retrospective study to compare the treatment outcomes with and without surgical navigation for fracture of the orbital wall10.1016/j.cjtee.2020.10.002 ↗
32. Characterization of the orbital volume in normal population10.1016/j.jcms.2018.02.003 ↗