ArticleJournal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma
Three dimensional scapular prints for evaluating glenoid morphology: An exploratory study.
Article 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. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Surgeon experience and measurement method influence consistency of glenoid bone loss assessment: a three-dimensional printing, computed tomography, and arthroscopy comparison.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- 3D bioprinting: a review and potential applications for Mohs micrographic surgery.Archives of dermatological research · 2024Review
- Impact of mechanical engineering innovations in biomedical advancements.In vitro models · 2024Review
- Article
- Advanced 3D Visualization and 3D Printing in Radiology.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2023Article
- Preoperative Planning Using 3D Printing Technology in Orthopedic Surgery.BioMed research international · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundComputerised Tomography (CT) scans are conventionally employed to assess the glenoid morphology prior to total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). This study explores the role of three-dimensional (3D) models for assessing glenoid morphology.
methodsCT scans of 32 patients scheduled for TSA were reconstructed to scapular models using customised software and a desktop 3D printer. The size and aspect ratios were maintained. Glenoid version, glenoid maximum height and width, and the maximum acromion antero-posterior (AP) length were compared between the models and CT scans.
resultsThe models were an accurate qualitative reflection of scapular anatomy. The average retroversion in 3D models was 8.19°±30.8° compared to 10.26°±42.5° in scan images. The mean difference was 2.07°±24.6° (p=0.408). However, the mean absolute error was 5.02°±12.3°. The mean difference of the glenoid maximum width and the acromion maximum AP length was 0.22±3.33mm (p=0.862) and 0.32±14.12mm (p=0.213) respectively. However, the mean difference was significant for the glenoid maximum height measuring 3.67±12.04mm with p=0.004. The correlation between the examiners was high for all parameters, with intraclass correlation ranging between 0.94 and 0.99.
conclusion3D printing technology promises to be a useful tool for preoperative planning with accurate reproduction of transverse plane anatomy. 3D prints represent superior definition of reconstructed anatomical measures such as glenoid height as compared to conventional CT Scans.
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.