ArticleArchives of plastic surgery2020
The utility of three-dimensional models in complex microsurgical reconstruction.
Article in Archives of plastic surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient-specific 3D-printed perforator mapping guide for propeller flap reconstruction in the hand.Journal of hand and microsurgery · 2026Article
- Future Applications for 3-dimensional Printed Virtual Surgical Planning in Microsurgery.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025Article
- Comparison of Iomeprol-400, Ultravist-370, and Omnipaque-350 in Preoperative Computed Tomography for Visualizing the Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforators.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025Article
- Three-Dimensional Printing in Breast Reconstruction: Current and Promising Applications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- 3D printing for an anterolateral thigh phalloplasty.3D printing in medicine · 2023Article
- Nanomedicine and nanoparticle-based delivery systems in plastic and reconstructive surgery.Maxillofacial plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2023Review
- Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) 3D Printing Special Interest Group (SIG) clinical situations for which 3D printing is considered an appropriate representation or extension of data contained in a medical imaging examination: breast conditions.3D printing in medicine · 2023Article
- Three-Dimensional Photography and Computer Modeling as a Reconstructive Surgical Training Tool.Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 2023Article
- A novel computed tomography angiography technique: guided preoperative localization and design of anterolateral thigh perforator flap.Insights into imaging · 2022Article
- 3D and 4D Printing in the Fight against Breast Cancer.Biosensors · 2022Review
- The Correlation Between Body Mass Index and Computed Tomography Angiography on Vascular Positioning in Anterolateral Thigh Flap Transplantation.Journal of the Belgian Society of Radiology · 2022Article
- Retrospective review of 108 breast reconstructions using the round block technique after breast-conserving surgery: Indications, complications, and outcomes.Archives of plastic surgery · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThree-dimensional (3D) model printing improves visualization of anatomical structures in space compared to two-dimensional (2D) data and creates an exact model of the surgical site that can be used for reference during surgery. There is limited evidence on the effects of using 3D models in microsurgical reconstruction on improving clinical outcomes.
methodsA retrospective review of patients undergoing reconstructive breast microsurgery procedures from 2017 to 2019 who received computed tomography angiography (CTA) scans only or with 3D models for preoperative surgical planning were performed. Preoperative decision-making to undergo a deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) versus muscle-sparing transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (MS-TRAM) flap, as well as whether the decision changed during flap harvest and postoperative complications were tracked based on the preoperative imaging used. In addition, we describe three example cases showing direct application of 3D mold as an accurate model to guide intraoperative dissection in complex microsurgical reconstruction.
resultsFifty-eight abdominal-based breast free-flaps performed using conventional CTA were compared with a matched cohort of 58 breast free-flaps performed with 3D model print. There was no flap loss in either group. There was a significant reduction in flap harvest time with use of 3D model (CTA vs. 3D, 117.7±14.2 minutes vs. 109.8±11.6 minutes; P=0.001). In addition, there was no change in preoperative decision on type of flap harvested in all cases in 3D print group (0%), compared with 24.1% change in conventional CTA group.
conclusionsUse of 3D print model improves accuracy of preoperative planning and reduces flap harvest time with similar postoperative complications in complex microsurgical reconstruction.
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.