Anatomical 3D Visualization for Surgery — Inner Bra Mastopexy, Dr. Buccheri

Anatomical 3D Visualization for Surgery — Inner Bra Mastopexy, Dr. Buccheri

The Dr. E. Buccheri Virtual Presentation of the Innovative “Inner Bra” Mastopexy Technique

Why a surgeon presents a new technique with 3D anatomy instead of photographs

When a surgeon takes a technique to a congress of peers, as Dr. Buccheri did with the Inner Bra mastopexy at CATBBAS, the audience is not asking what the result looks like: they already know that. They want to see what the surgeon does, in which plane, in what order, and why that order matters. Clinical photography shows the before and the after; intraoperative video shows a real field, but with blood, retractors and a camera angle nobody chose for teaching. Anatomical 3D visualization shows the plane the technique works in, with everything else removed.

It also removes the two practical obstacles of real imagery. A 3D model contains no patient, so there is no consent or privacy question attached to showing it in an auditorium, in a paper or on a website. And because the camera, the transparency and the pace are decided rather than captured, the same sequence can be slowed down, repeated, or cut open at exactly the moment the audience needs to understand the manoeuvre.

Frequently asked questions about anatomical 3D visualization for surgery

What does the surgeon need to provide to start?
The clinical criterion. We work from the medical script the specialist provides: which planes are involved, what is sutured or repositioned and in what sequence, and which detail distinguishes this technique from the conventional one. Sketches, intraoperative photographs or a recording of the surgeon explaining the technique out loud are all useful raw material; a formal document is not required.

Are the anatomical models accurate?
Our 3D human anatomy models are based on real anatomical data, which is what makes them usable in front of a specialist audience. For presenting a technique, a representative anatomy is normally the right choice rather than one specific patient: the aim is that any surgeon in the room recognises the plane, not that they recognise a case.

Can it be based on a specific patient instead?
That is a different kind of project — closer to surgical planning than to teaching a technique — and it depends on the imaging available. For a congress presentation, a representative model is usually clearer, because a single patient’s anatomy carries variations that distract from the manoeuvre being explained.

Does this replace the surgical video?
No, and the two work well together. The animation explains what should happen and why; the video proves that it happens in a real field. A common structure at a congress is to introduce the technique with the 3D sequence and then show the corresponding intraoperative footage, so the audience already knows what to look for.

Can the same visualization be reused to explain the technique to patients?
Yes, and it usually needs a different edit rather than different 3D work. A version for peers keeps the anatomical nomenclature and the technical detail; a version for a patient consultation is shorter, names fewer structures and focuses on what changes for the person, using the same model and the same camera work.

How many rounds of review are there?
The technique is validated before it is rendered. First a drawn storyboard, so the surgeon can correct planes and framings while correcting is cheap; then preview images during the modelling stage, to validate anatomy, materials and finishes. Nothing goes to final render until the specialist confirms that what is shown is what they do.

Can it be an interactive presentation rather than a linear video?
Yes. The same anatomy can be delivered as a 3D presentation the surgeon controls on stage, stopping at a given step or rotating the model in answer to a question from the floor, which suits a session with discussion better than a fixed-length video.

Does it work for specialties other than plastic surgery?
The method does not change with the specialty: identify the plane, remove what obscures it, and stage the sequence. What changes is the anatomy that has to be built and the level of detail the audience of that specialty expects, which is defined with the surgeon at the script stage.

What happens if the technique evolves after the animation is made?
A refinement to one step is usually a partial update: the affected sequence is adjusted and re-rendered while the anatomical model and the rest of the piece stay as they are. That matters for a technique presented at successive congresses, where each edition tends to add a nuance.

Who is this kind of project for?
Surgeons and clinics presenting a technique to their peers, at a congress or in teaching material, and medical device manufacturers whose product only makes sense once the surgical gesture around it is understood.

If you have developed a technique and you need a specialist audience to understand it in the few minutes a congress gives you, at Pixel Medical Animation we build the anatomy and stage the sequence from your own clinical criterion.

PROJECTS

• Corsa
• Bionet

RELEVANT SOLUTIONS