Continuing the Legacy of Grant’s Museum: Anatomy Education in the Digital Era

Abstract

IntroductionIn the 1930s, an innovative adjunct available to anatomy learners was Grant’s Atlas of Anatomy and Grant’s Museum specimens of regional anatomy. With advancements in technology, learning tools used in anatomy education now also include digital reproductions of cadaveric specimens into 3D or interactive formats. Recent pivoting to online teaching and increased reliance on digital resources makes it a natural progression to advance the legacy of Grant's work with an online library of 3D models matching the museum. Realistic digital models are typically produced by either 3D reconstruction from image data, or photogrammetry, both requiring technical skill and time. Recent advances in light technology scanning equipment like the Artec Space Spider claim to produce a high‐fidelity 3D model within a time frame of 2‐3 hours from scan to finished digital model using their bundled software. In an ongoing project creating 3D models from prosections reproducing Grant’s Museum, we aimed to determine the efficiency of digital capture and the final model fidelity using the Artec Space Spider scanner.MethodsTwenty‐seven prosections were created to replicate 38 figures in Grant’s Atlas, ranging from simple geometries such as a lung, to more complex, including the posterior abdominal wall.Scanning & post‐processing: Prosections were scanned using the Artec Space Spider, which captured images at around 7.5 frames per second (0.1 mm resolution). Post‐processing was completed in Artec Studio (Artec Studio 15 Professional x64 15.1.2.60) including alignment, hole‐filling and texture overlay. Early on, it was determined that many models needed digital sculpting, so we engaged expert digital artists using software (Zbrush 2021.6.6) for refinement of the models. The amount of time it took to scan and process each model was calculated to determine efficiency of model development.Fidelity confirmation: Ongoing feedback is being collected from an expert panel of anatomists representing five post‐secondary institutions. These experts are provided finished digital models and feedback is collected on the aspects of texture, lighting, anatomical detail (resolution) and model manipulation (user tools for examining online). This feedback will be finalized in February 2022.ResultsTable 1 depicts the breakdown of scanning and post‐processing time. Forty percent of the models were completed in under 3 hours, and these included prosections with simple geometries. Sixty percent of the models took more than 3 hours to complete, and these included more intricate prosections.ConclusionsWhile the Artec Space Spider may be a great tool to quickly generate anatomical models with simple geometry or features, it may not be ideal for replicating intricate anatomical prosections. Only 40% of scans took less than 3 hours to complete with most moderately complex models and all complex models taking over 3 hours. Much of the time spent on these models was in post‐processing, which was dedicated to filling gaps or refining the details of the models. Our findings suggest that the time:cost ratio may not justify the purchase of such high‐level technology when photogrammetry may result in similar models for relatively less investment.