ReviewCraniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction2017
Three-Dimensional Printing: Custom-Made Implants for Craniomaxillofacial Reconstructive Surgery.
Review in Craniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction, 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.
- 3D Modelling for Preoperative Planning, Intraoperative Navigation, and Training in Pancreatic Surgery: A Systematic Review.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2026Review
- Using microwave ablation in combination with curettage and reconstruction with a vascularized iliac bone graft guided by a three-dimensional printed model for the treatment of a grade III talar giant cell tumor: a case report.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Efficacy of Three-Dimensional Printing in the Management of Frontal Bone Trauma.Journal of neurological surgery. Part B, Skull base · 2025Article
- Adoption of additive manufacturing in oral and maxillofacial surgery among university and non-university hospitals in Sweden: findings from a nationwide survey.Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2024Article
- Biofabrication methods for reconstructing extracellular matrix mimetics.Bioactive materials · 2024Review
- Three-dimensional Medical Printing and Associated Legal Issues in Plastic Surgery: A Scoping Review.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2023Article
- Facial defects reconstruction by titanium mesh bending using 3D printing technology: A report of two cases.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2022Article
- Value of 3D printing technology combined with indocyanine green fluorescent navigation in complex laparoscopic hepatectomy.PloS one · 2022Article
- Procedure Increasing the Accuracy of Modelling and the Manufacturing of Surgical Templates with the Use of 3D Printing Techniques, Applied in Planning the Procedures of Reconstruction of the Mandible.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Custom 3D-printed Titanium Implant for Reconstruction of a Composite Chest and Abdominal Wall Defect.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2021Article
- 3D Printing of Physical Organ Models: Recent Developments and Challenges.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2021Review
- Simplifying Bony Midface Reconstruction with Patient-specific Titanium Plates.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2021Article
- Three-dimensional Printing in Plastic Surgery: Current Applications, Future Directions, and Ethical Implications.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2021Article
- Identifying a commercially-available 3D printing process that minimizes model distortion after annealing and autoclaving and the effect of steam sterilization on mechanical strength.3D printing in medicine · 2020Article
- The use of 3D printing in cardiac surgery.Journal of thoracic disease · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Craniomaxillofacial reconstructive surgery is a challenging field. First it aims to restore primary functions and second to preserve craniofacial anatomical features like symmetry and harmony. Three-dimensional (3D) printed biomodels have been widely adopted in medical fields by providing tactile feedback and a superior appreciation of visuospatial relationship between anatomical structures. Craniomaxillofacial reconstructive surgery was one of the first areas to implement 3D printing technology in their practice. Biomodeling has been used in craniofacial reconstruction of traumatic injuries, congenital disorders, tumor removal, iatrogenic injuries (e.g., decompressive craniectomies), orthognathic surgery, and implantology. 3D printing has proven to improve and enable an optimization of preoperative planning, develop intraoperative guidance tools, reduce operative time, and significantly improve the biofunctional and the aesthetic outcome. This technology has also shown great potential in enriching the teaching of medical students and surgical residents. The aim of this review is to present the current status of 3D printing technology and its practical and innovative applications, specifically in craniomaxillofacial reconstructive surgery, illustrated with two clinical cases where the 3D printing technology was successfully used.
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.