Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34240580›Full record

ReviewAdvanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany)2021

3D Printing of Physical Organ Models: Recent Developments and Challenges.

Zhongboyu Jin, Yuanrong Li, Kang Yu, Linxiang Liu, Jianzhong Fu, Xinhua Yao, Aiguo Zhang, Yong He

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. 3D Modelling for Preoperative Planning, Intraoperative Navigation, and Training in Pancreatic Surgery: A Systematic Review.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2026
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Materiobiology in the omics era.Materials today. Bio · 2025
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Zhongboyu JinState Key Laboratory of Fluid Power and Mechatronic Systems, School of Mechanical Engineering, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310027, China.ORCID 0000-0001-8936-6225
Yuanrong LiState Key Laboratory of Fluid Power and Mechatronic Systems, School of Mechanical Engineering, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310027, China.
Kang YuState Key Laboratory of Fluid Power and Mechatronic Systems, School of Mechanical Engineering, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310027, China.
Linxiang LiuZhejiang University Hospital, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310027, China.
Jianzhong FuState Key Laboratory of Fluid Power and Mechatronic Systems, School of Mechanical Engineering, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310027, China.
Xinhua YaoState Key Laboratory of Fluid Power and Mechatronic Systems, School of Mechanical Engineering, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310027, China.
Aiguo ZhangDepartment of Orthopedics, Wuxi Children's Hospital affiliated to Nanjing Medical University, Wuxi, Jiangsu, 214023, China.
Yong HeState Key Laboratory of Fluid Power and Mechatronic Systems, School of Mechanical Engineering, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310027, China.ORCID 0000-0002-9099-0831

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 51821093National Nature Science Foundation of China 81827804Science Fund for Creative Research Groups
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Physical organ models are the objects that replicate the patient-specific anatomy and have played important roles in modern medical diagnosis and disease treatment. 3D printing, as a powerful multi-function manufacturing technology, breaks the limitations of traditional methods and provides a great potential for manufacturing organ models. However, the clinical application of organ model is still in small scale, facing the challenges including high cost, poor mimicking performance and insufficient accuracy. In this review, the mainstream 3D printing technologies are introduced, and the existing manufacturing methods are divided into "directly printing" and "indirectly printing", with an emphasis on choosing suitable techniques and materials. This review also summarizes the ideas to address these challenges and focuses on three points: 1) what are the characteristics and requirements of organ models in different application scenarios, 2) how to choose the suitable 3D printing methods and materials according to different application categories, and 3) how to reduce the cost of organ models and make the process simple and convenient. Moreover, the state-of-the-art in organ models are summarized and the contribution of 3D printed organ models to various surgical procedures is highlighted. Finally, current limitations, evaluation criteria and future perspectives for this emerging area are discussed.

Indexed as

Durable Medical EquipmentModels, AnatomicPrinting, Three-DimensionalHumans3D printingphysical organ modelspolymer materialssurgical applications

Identifiers

PMID34240580
PMCPMC8425903

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.