ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2020
Accuracy Assessment of Molded, Patient-Specific Polymethylmethacrylate Craniofacial Implants Compared to Their 3D Printed Originals.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multi-Stage micro-CT-based dimensional accuracy assessment of a voronoi-based patient-specific cranial implant fabricated by electron beam melting.Frontiers in medical technology · 2026Article
- Outstretching challenges for rehabilitation of a mucormycotic case-a digitally designed patient-specific implant approach in the recent era.BMC oral health · 2024Article
- Exploring 3D Printed Implants With Anti-Dropout Function to Overcome Time Constraints in Acute Orbital Fractures for Patient-Specific Implants.The Journal of craniofacial surgery · 2024Article
- Article
- Breaking Barriers in Cranioplasty: 3D Printing in Low and Middle-Income Settings-Insights from Zenica, Bosnia and Herzegovina.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Observational
- In Vitro and In Vivo Biological Assessments of 3D-Bioprinted Scaffolds for Dental Applications.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Article
- Point-of-Care Virtual Surgical Planning and 3D Printing in Oral and Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Patient specific Polymethyl methacrylate customised cranioplasty using 3D printed silicone moulds: Technical note.The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS · 2022Article
- Biomechanical Evaluation of Patient-Specific Polymethylmethacrylate Cranial Implants for Virtual Surgical Planning: An In-Vitro Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Subgaleal Effusion and Brain Midline Shift After Cranioplasty: A Retrospective Study Between Polyetheretherketone Cranioplasty and Titanium Cranioplasty After Decompressive Craniectomy.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Customized alloplastic cranioplasty of large bone defects by 3D-printed prefabricated mold template after posttraumatic decompressive craniectomy: A technical note.Surgical neurology international · 2022Article
- Sinus Lift and Implant Insertion on 3D-Printed Polymeric Maxillary Models: Ex Vivo Training for In Vivo Surgical Procedures.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Thickness accuracy of virtually designed patient-specific implants for large neurocranial defects.Journal of anatomy · 2021Article
- Quantitative Assessment of Point-of-Care 3D-Printed Patient-Specific Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Cranial Implants.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
- Overview of In-Hospital 3D Printing and Practical Applications in Hand Surgery.BioMed research international · 2021Article
- Design and Additive Manufacturing of a Biomimetic Customized Cranial Implant Based on Voronoi Diagram.Frontiers in physiology · 2021Article
- Quality Characteristics and Clinical Relevance of In-House 3D-Printed Customized Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Implants for Craniofacial Reconstruction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Customized Cost-Effective Polymethyl-Methacrylate Cranioplasty Implant Using Three-Dimensional Printer.Asian journal of neurosurgeryArticle
- Patient-Specific Implants in Maxillofacial Reconstruction - A Case Report.Annals of maxillofacial surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of patient-specific implants (PSIs) in craniofacial surgery is often limited due to a lack of expertise and/or production costs. Therefore, a simple and cost-efficient template-based fabrication workflow has been developed to overcome these disadvantages. The aim of this study is to assess the accuracy of PSIs made from their original templates. For a representative cranial defect (CRD) and a temporo-orbital defect (TOD), ten PSIs were made from polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) using computer-aided design (CAD) and three-dimensional (3D) printing technology. These customized implants were measured and compared with their original 3D printed templates. The implants for the CRD revealed a root mean square (RMS) value ranging from 1.128 to 0.469 mm with a median RMS (Q1 to Q3) of 0.574 (0.528 to 0.701) mm. Those for the TOD revealed an RMS value ranging from 1.079 to 0.630 mm with a median RMS (Q1 to Q3) of 0.843 (0.635 to 0.943) mm. This study demonstrates that a highly precise duplication of PSIs can be achieved using this template-molding workflow. Thus, virtually planned implants can be accurately transferred into haptic PSIs. This workflow appears to offer a sophisticated solution for craniofacial reconstruction and continues to prove itself in daily clinical practice.
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.