ArticleActa cirurgica brasileira2020
3D anatomical model for teaching canine lumbosacral epidural anesthesia.
Article in Acta cirurgica brasileira, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of three-dimensional printed lumbar spine-model-based training for epidural anesthesia in novice anesthesiology residents.Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA · 2026Trial
- Physical models and simulators in veterinary education: current status, learning impact, and future perspectives.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Review
- SimuVet: a preliminary study of the innovative development of a simulator for epidural anesthesia training in dogs.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose To develop a 3D anatomical model for teaching canine epidural anesthesia (3DMEA) and to assess its efficacy for teaching and learning prior to the use of live animals. Methods The creation of 3DMEA was based on 3D optical scanning and 3D printing of canine bone pieces of the fifth to the seventh lumbar vertebrae, sacrum and pelvis. A total of 20 male dogs were scheduled for castration. 20 veterinary students watched a video showing epidural anesthesia in dogs before the clinical attempt and were assigned to control or 3DMEA groups. Students in the 3DMEA group trained in the model after the video. For the clinical trial, the epidural procedure was performed by students under the veterinary supervision. When observed the absence of response to nociceptive stimuli, the epidural was considered successful. Then, all students answered a questionnaire evaluating the main difficulty founded in the technique and its degree of difficulty. Results The 3DMEA group reported a lower degree of difficulty to perform the epidural anesthesia technique when compared with the control group (p=0.0037). The 3DMEA reproduced the anatomical structures, allowing the perception of the distance of needle in relation to the iliac prominences during epidural anesthesia. Its mobility allowed simulation of the animal in standing position and sternal recumbency. Conclusion The use of 3DMEA demonstrated greater efficacy in the execution of the technique, being effective in the teaching and learning process before the epidural anesthesia in live animals.
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.