ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2021
Traditional versus mirror three-dimensional printing technology for isolated acetabular fractures: a retrospective study with a median follow-up of 25 months.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- How Can Technology Improve Acetabular and Pelvic Fractures Management in the Operating Room? A Systematic Review.Orthopaedic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Developing a core outcome set for acetabular fractures: a systematic review (part I).Systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Experimental study on the biomechanical stability of complex acetabular fractures in the quadrilateral area: application of a dynamic anterior titanium-plate screw system.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Article
- Review
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the outcomes of traditional three-dimensional (3D) printing technology (TPT) versus mirror 3D printing technology (MTT) in treating isolated acetabular fractures (IAFs).
methodsConsecutive patients with an IAF treated by either TPT or MTT at our tertiary medical centre from 2012 to 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Follow-up was performed 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively and annually thereafter. The primary outcome was the Harris hip score (HHS), and the secondary outcomes were major intraoperative variables and key orthopaedic complications.
resultsOne hundred fourteen eligible patients (114 hips) with an IAF (TPT, n = 56; MTT, n = 58) were evaluated. The median follow-up was 25 months (range, 21-28 months). At the last follow-up, the mean HHS was 82.46 ±14.70 for TPT and 86.30 ± 13.26 for MTT with a statistically significant difference. Significant differences were also detected in the major intraoperative variables (operation time, intraoperative blood loss, number of fluoroscopic screenings, and anatomical reduction number) and the major orthopaedic complications (loosening, implant failure, and heterotopic ossification).
conclusionCompared with TPT, MTT tends to produce accurate IAF reduction and may result in better intraoperative variables and a lower rate of major orthopaedic complications.
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.