ArticleCureus2020
Orientation Planning in the Fused Deposition Modeling 3D Printing of Anatomical Spine Models.
Article in Cureus, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- 3D printing as a pedagogical tool for teaching normal human anatomy: a systematic review.BMC medical education · 2023Pooled it
- Current update and trend of 3D printing in spinal surgery: A bibliometric analysis and review of literature.Journal of orthopaedics · 2024Review
- Effect of Sterilization on the Dimensional and Mechanical Behavior of Polylactic Acid Pieces Produced by Fused Deposition Modeling.Polymers · 2023Article
- Tridimensional models and radiographic study of dorsal laminectomy and thoracolumbar hemilaminectomy in dogs.Acta cirurgica brasileira · 2023Article
- Application of 3D printed models in the surgical treatment of spinal deformity.American journal of translational research · 2022Article
- Three-Dimensionally Printed Surgical Simulation Tool for Brain Mapping Training and Preoperative Planning.Operative neurosurgery (Hagerstown, Md.) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Three-dimensional (3D) printing has revolutionized medical training and patient care. Clinically it is used for patient-specific anatomical modeling with respect to surgical procedures. 3D printing is heavily implemented for simulation to provide a useful tool for anatomical knowledge and surgical techniques. Fused deposition modeling (FDM) is a commonly utilized method of 3D printing anatomical models due to its cost-effectiveness. A potential disadvantage of FDM 3D printing complex anatomical shapes is the limitations of the modeling system in providing accurate representations of multifaceted ultrastructure, such as the facets of the lumbar spine. In order to utilize FDM 3D printing methods in an efficient manner, the pre-printing G-code assembly must be oriented according to the anatomical nature of the print. This article describes the approach that our institution's 3D printing laboratory has used to manipulate models' printing angles in regard to the print bed and nozzle, according to anatomical properties, thus creating quality and cost-effective anatomical spine models for education and procedural simulation.
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.