ArticlePloS one2017
Interactive reconstructions of cranial 3D implants under MeVisLab as an alternative to commercial planning software.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 53 citations in OpenAlex.
- A review of 3D printed medical implant design.3D printing in medicine · 2026Article
- Deep learning-based automatic cranial implant design through direct defect shape prediction and its comparison study.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2025Article
- Neural shape completion for personalized Maxillofacial surgery.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Personalized 3D-printed cranial implants for complex cranioplasty using open-source software.Surgical neurology international · 2024Article
- Optimization of Fixations for Additively Manufactured Cranial Implants: Insights from Finite Element Analysis.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- The simplified tailor-made workflows for a 3D slicer-based craniofacial implant design.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- 3D Multi-Modality Medical Imaging: Combining Anatomical and Infrared Thermal Images for 3D Reconstruction.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Virtual reconstruction of midfacial bone defect based on generative adversarial network.Head & face medicine · 2022Article
- Studierfenster: an Open Science Cloud-Based Medical Imaging Analysis Platform.Journal of digital imaging · 2022Article
- Thickness accuracy of virtually designed patient-specific implants for large neurocranial defects.Journal of anatomy · 2021Article
- Synthetic skull bone defects for automatic patient-specific craniofacial implant design.Scientific data · 2021Article
- A review on computer-aided design and manufacturing of patient-specific maxillofacial implants.Expert review of medical devices · 2020Review
- A Marker-Less Registration Approach for Mixed Reality-Aided Maxillofacial Surgery: a Pilot Evaluation.Journal of digital imaging · 2019Article
- Implementation of a semiautomatic method to design patient-specific instruments for corrective osteotomy of the radius.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2019Article
- Planning of skull reconstruction based on a statistical shape model combined with geometric morphometrics.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this publication, the interactive planning and reconstruction of cranial 3D Implants under the medical prototyping platform MeVisLab as alternative to commercial planning software is introduced. In doing so, a MeVisLab prototype consisting of a customized data-flow network and an own C++ module was set up. As a result, the Computer-Aided Design (CAD) software prototype guides a user through the whole workflow to generate an implant. Therefore, the workflow begins with loading and mirroring the patients head for an initial curvature of the implant. Then, the user can perform an additional Laplacian smoothing, followed by a Delaunay triangulation. The result is an aesthetic looking and well-fitting 3D implant, which can be stored in a CAD file format, e.g. STereoLithography (STL), for 3D printing. The 3D printed implant can finally be used for an in-depth pre-surgical evaluation or even as a real implant for the patient. In a nutshell, our research and development shows that a customized MeVisLab software prototype can be used as an alternative to complex commercial planning software, which may also not be available in every clinic. Finally, not to conform ourselves directly to available commercial software and look for other options that might improve the workflow.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.