Article3D printing in medicine2021
3D-printed saw guides for lower arm osteotomy, a comparison between a synthetic CT and CT-based workflow.
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. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Experience with patient-specific guides, insteatientad of general surgical experience, improves the accuracy of 3D-guided corrective osteotomies.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2026Article
- Development of a flexible liver phantom for hepatocellular carcinoma treatment planning: a useful tool for training & education.3D printing in medicine · 2024Article
- Machine Learning for Medical Image Translation: A Systematic Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Advanced Image Segmentation and Modeling - A Review of the 2021-2022 Thematic Series.3D printing in medicine · 2023Review
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging Versus Computed Tomography for Three-Dimensional Bone Imaging of Musculoskeletal Pathologies: A Review.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2022Review
- Synthetic CT for the planning of MR-HIFU treatment of bone metastases in pelvic and femoral bones: a feasibility study.European radiology · 2022Article
- The Role of 3D Printing in Planning Complex Medical Procedures and Training of Medical Professionals-Cross-Sectional Multispecialty Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
- Correction to Acknowledgement.3D printing in medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThree-dimensional (3D)-printed saw guides are frequently used to optimize osteotomy results and are usually designed based on computed tomography (CT), despite the radiation burden, as radiation-less alternatives like magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) have inferior bone visualization capabilities. This study investigated the usability of MR-based synthetic-CT (sCT), a novel radiation-less bone visualization technique for 3D planning and design of patient-specific saw guides.
methodsEight human cadaveric lower arms (mean age: 78y) received MRI and CT scans as well as high-resolution micro-CT. From the MRI scans, sCT were generated using a conditional generative adversarial network. Digital 3D bone surface models based on the sCT and general CT were compared to the surface model from the micro-CT that was used as ground truth for image resolution. From both the sCT and CT digital bone models saw guides were designed and 3D-printed in nylon for one proximal and one distal bone position for each radius and ulna. Six blinded observers placed these saw guides as accurately as possible on dissected bones. The position of each guide was assessed by optical 3D-scanning of each bone with positioned saw guide and compared to the preplanning. Eight placement errors were evaluated: three translational errors (along each axis), three rotational errors (around each axis), a total translation (∆T) and a total rotation error (∆R).
resultsSurface models derived from micro-CT were on average smaller than sCT and CT-based models with average differences of 0.27 ± 0.30 mm for sCT and 0.24 ± 0.12 mm for CT. No statistically significant positioning differences on the bones were found between sCT- and CT-based saw guides for any axis specific translational or rotational errors nor between the ∆T (p = .284) and ∆R (p = .216). On Bland-Altman plots, the ∆T and ∆R limits of agreement (LoA) were within the inter-observer variability LoA.
conclusionsThis research showed a similar error for sCT and CT digital surface models when comparing to ground truth micro-CT models. Additionally, the saw guide study showed equivalent CT- and sCT-based saw guide placement errors. Therefore, MRI-based synthetic CT is a promising radiation-less alternative to CT for the creation of patient-specific osteotomy surgical saw guides.
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.