Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34377517›Full record

ArticleJournal of hip preservation surgery2020

3D-printed models for periacetabular osteotomy surgical planning.

B Keegan Markhardt, Matthew A Beilfuss, Scott J Hetzel, David C Goodspeed, Andrea M Spiker

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of hip preservation surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 3D Printing Technology in Pediatric Orthopedics: a Primer for the Clinician.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2023
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
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

5 authors.

B Keegan MarkhardtDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, University of Wisconsin Clinical Science Center, 600 Highland Ave. Madison, WI 53792, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0801-8809
Matthew A BeilfussDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Wisconsin-Madison, University of Wisconsin Clinical Science Center, 600 Highland Ave. Madison, WI 53792, USA.
Scott J HetzelDepartment of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, University of Wisconsin Clinical Science Center, 600 Highland Ave. Madison, WI 53792, USA.
David C GoodspeedDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Wisconsin-Madison, University of Wisconsin Clinical Science Center, 600 Highland Ave. Madison, WI 53792, USA.
Andrea M SpikerDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Wisconsin-Madison, University of Wisconsin Clinical Science Center, 600 Highland Ave. Madison, WI 53792, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the feasibility and clinical benefits of using 3D-printed hemipelvis models for periacetabular osteotomy preoperative planning in the treatment of hip dysplasia. This retrospective study included 28 consecutive cases in 26 patients, with two bilateral cases, who underwent periacetabular osteotomy between January 2017 and February 2020 and had routine radiographs, CT and MR imaging. Of these, 14 cases [mean patient age 30.7 (SD 8.4) years, 11 female] had routine preoperative imaging, and 14 cases [mean patient age 28.0 (SD 8.7) years, 13 female] had routine preoperative imaging and creation of a full-scale 3D-printed hemipelvis model from the CT data. The expected surgical cuts were performed on the 3D-printed models. All patients underwent Bernese periacetabular osteotomy. Operative times, including time to achieve proper acetabular position and total periacetabular osteotomy time, fluoroscopy radiation dose and estimated total blood loss were compiled. ANOVA compared outcome variables between the two patient groups, controlling for possible confounders. On average, patients who had additional preoperative planning using the 3D-printed model had a 5.5-min reduction in time to achieve proper acetabular position and a 14.5-min reduction in total periacetabular osteotomy time; however, these changes were not statistically significant (

Identifiers

PMID34377517
PMCPMC8349591

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.