Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30202148›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma

Publication trends and knowledge mapping in 3D printing in orthopaedics.

Raju Vaishya, Mohit Kumar Patralekh, Abhishek Vaish, Amit Kumar Agarwal, Vipul Vijay

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 99 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Improving Patient Understanding of Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome With Three-Dimensional Models.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2024
    Article
  6. Artificial intelligence-based orthopaedic perpetual design.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Raju VaishyaDepartment of Orthopaedics and Joint Replacement, Indraprastha Apollo Hospital, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi, India.
Mohit Kumar PatralekhCentral Institute of Orthopaedics, Safdarjung Hospital and VMMC, New Delhi, 110029, India.
Abhishek VaishDepartment of Orthopaedics and Joint Replacement, Indraprastha Apollo Hospital, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi, India.
Amit Kumar AgarwalDepartment of Orthopaedics and Joint Replacement, Indraprastha Apollo Hospital, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi, India.
Vipul VijayDepartment of Orthopaedics and Joint Replacement, Indraprastha Apollo Hospital, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi, India.
Indraprastha Apollo Hospitals · INSafdarjang Hospital · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThree dimensional (3D) printing, also called 'rapid prototyping' and 'additive manufacturing' is considered as a "second industrial revolution." With this rapidly emerging technology, CT or MR images are used for the creation of graspable objects from 3D reconstituted images. Patient-specific anatomical models can be, therefore, manufactured efficiently. These can enhance surgeon's understanding of their patients' patho-anatomy and also help in precise preoperative planning. The 3D printed patient-specific guides can also help in achieving accurate bony cuts, precise implant placement, and nice surgical results. Customized implants, casts, orthoses and prosthetics can be created to match an individual patient's anatomy. The 3D printing of individualized artificial cartilage scaffolds and 3D bioprinting are some other areas of growing interest. We aim to study the publication trends in 3D printing as applied to the field of orthopaedics. MATERIALS AND

methodsA literature search was performed to extract all papers related to 3D printing applications in orthopaedics and allied sciences on the Pubmed, Web of Science and SCOPUS databases. Suitable keywords and boolean operators ("3D Printing" OR "3-dimensional printing" OR "3D printed" OR "additive manufacturing" OR "rapid prototyping") AND (''Orthopaedics" OR "Orthopaedics'') were used, in May 2018. Search was attempted in Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Database of Abstracts of Review of Effectiveness (DARE) databases, using keywords 3d printing orthopaedics. A similar search was repeated in pubmed and SCOPUS to get more specific papers.No limits were set on the period or evidence level, as 3D printing in orthopaedics is relatively new and evidence available is usually limited to low-level studies. Trends in a publication on these topics were analyzed, focussing on publications, type of research (basic science or clinical), type of publication, authors, institution, and country. Some citations received by these papers were also analyzed in SCOPUS and Web of Science. MS Excel (2008 - Mac version) and VOS Viewer1.6.8 (2018- Mac version) software were used to analyze the search results and for citation mapping respectively. We also identified top 10 most cited articles in the field.

resultsAn increasing trend in publications in 3D printing-related work in orthopedic surgery and related fields was observed in the recent past. A search on Pubmed using the above strategy revealed 389 documents. A similar search revealed 653 documents on SCOPUS, many (314) of which were from an engineering background and only 271 were related to medicine. No papers were found in the Cochrane database. Search on TRIP database revealed 195 papers. A similar search revealed 237 papers on orthopedic applications on Pubmed and 269 documents on SCOPUS, whereas a search on Web of Science revealed only 23 papers. Publication trends were then analyzed on data derived from SCOPUS database. Overall, most papers were published from China, followed by United States, United Kingdom, and India.

conclusionThere has been an upsurge of interest in 3D printing in orthopedic surgery, as is evident by an increasing trend in research and publications in this area in the recent years. Presently, 3D printing is in a primitive stage in the field of orthopedic surgery as our knowledge is still insufficient, and costs and learning curve are somewhat high. However, looking at latest publication trends, we are enthusiastic that it holds the key to future in orthopaedics and trauma cases.

Indexed as

3D printingAdditive manufacturingArthroplastyOrthopaedicsRapid prototypingSpine

Identifiers

PMID30202148
PMCPMC6128796
OpenAlexW2885990279

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.