ArticleCraniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction2020
Ceramic 3D-Printed Titanium Cranioplasty.
Article in Craniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-term evaluation of patient-specific carbon fiber implants for calvarial defects.Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2026Trial
- Cranial Bone Repair and Regeneration After Trauma: Forensic and Clinical Medico-Legal Consequences.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage: Which one should we choose between laser navigation and 3D navigation mold?Frontiers in surgery · 2023Article
- Customized Additive Manufacturing in Bone Scaffolds-The Gateway to Precise Bone Defect Treatment.Research (Washington, D.C.) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designInlay cranioplasties following partial craniectomy in tumor or trauma cases and onlay cranioplasties for reconstructions of residual developmental skull anomalies are frequently performed using CAD-CAM techniques.
objectiveIn this case series, we present a novel cranial implant design, being a combination of 3D-printed titanium grade 23 and calcium phosphate paste (CeTi).
methodsThe titanium patient-specific implant, manufactured using selective laser melting, has a latticed border with interconnected micropores. The cranioplasty is miniscrew fixed and its border zone subsequently partially filled with calcium phosphate paste to promote osteoinduction and osteoconduction. From April 2017 to April 2019, 8 patients have been treated with such a CeTi implant. The inlay cranioplasties were each time revision surgeries of complicated cases.
resultsAll implants were successful after a limited follow-up time (range 18-42 months). There were no dehiscences and no infections, and no complaints of thermal conduction.
conclusionsThe proposed CeTi cranial implant combines the strength of titanium implants with the biological integration potential of ceramic implants and seems particularly resistant to infection, probably due to the biofunctionalized titanium surface and the antimicrobial activity of elevated intracellular free calcium levels.
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.