Article3D printing in medicine2021
Cranioplasty with three-dimensional customised mould for polymethylmethacrylate implant: a series of 16 consecutive patients with cost-effectiveness consideration.
Article in 3D printing in medicine, 2021. 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, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hydrogel Implementing Drug Delivery in Cranial Bone Tissue Engineering.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
- Development of a new operative 3D printed template-cranioplasty-concept for performing craniotomy in the posterior cranial fossa and validation of the system using a 3D printed simulation model: a preclinical feasibility study.3D printing in medicine · 2026Article
- Comparative Safety and Efficacy of Patient-Specific Versus Hand-Molded Implants in Cranioplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Single-Session Surgical Intervention with Resection of a Primary Cranial Osteosarcoma and Cranioplasty using a 3D-Printed Craniotomy Template and Cranioplasty Molds.Journal of neurological surgery reports · 2025Article
- Breaking Barriers in Cranioplasty: 3D Printing in Low and Middle-Income Settings-Insights from Zenica, Bosnia and Herzegovina.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Observational
- Clinical Outcomes of 3D-Printed Bioresorbable Scaffolds for Bone Tissue Engineering-A Pilot Study on 126 Patients for Burrhole Covers in Subdural Hematoma.Biomedicines · 2022Article
- Low-Cost Cranioplasty-A Systematic Review of 3D Printing in Medicine.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Review
- 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
- Customized alloplastic cranioplasty of large bone defects by 3D-printed prefabricated mold template after posttraumatic decompressive craniectomy: A technical note.Surgical neurology international · 2022Article
- Quantitative Assessment of Point-of-Care 3D-Printed Patient-Specific Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Cranial Implants.International journal of molecular sciences · 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
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDifferent methods of cranioplasty for the reconstruction of bony skull defects exist. In the absence of the autologous bone flap, a customised manufactured implant may be the optimal choice, but this implant has several limitations regarding its technical standardisation and better cost-effectiveness.
methodsThis study presents a series of 16 consecutive patients who had undergone cranioplasty with customised three-dimensional (3D) template moulds for polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) implants manufactured after 3D modelling on a specific workstation. The virtual images were transformed into a two-piece physical model using a 3D printer for the biomaterials. PMMA implant was produced intraoperatively with the custom mould. Cosmetic results were analysed by comparing pre- and postoperative 3D computed tomography (CT) images and asking if the patient was satisfied with the result.
resultsThe average total time for planning and production of customised mould was 10 days. The 16 patients were satisfied with the result, and CT images presented harmonious symmetry when comparing pre- and postoperative scans. Cases of postoperative infection, bleeding, or reoperation in this series were not observed.
conclusionCranioplasty with high-technology customised 3D moulds for PMMA implants can allow for an aesthetic reconstruction with a fast and cost-effective manufacturing process and possibly with low complication rates.
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.