ArticleNeurospine2022
Reconstruction of the Cervical Lateral Mass Using 3-Dimensional-Printed Prostheses.
Article in Neurospine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Clinical applications of 3D printing in spine surgery: a systematic review.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025Pooled it
- Individualized C1-2 intra-articular three-dimensional printed porous titanium alloy cage for craniovertebral deformity.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Article
- An overview of 3D printed metal implants in orthopedic applications: Present and future perspectives.Heliyon · 2023Review
- A case report: Bilateral reconstruction of C2 lateral masses with expandable titanium cages following axis (C2) solitary plasmacytoma resection with 2-year follow-up.Surgical neurology international · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to investigate the outcome of using 3-dimensional (3D)-printed prostheses to reconstruct a cervical lateral mass to maintain cervical stability.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed data of 7 patients who underwent cervical lateral mass reconstruction using a 3D-printed prosthesis, comprising axial and subaxial lateral mass reconstruction in 2 and 5 patients, respectively. Bilateral mass was reconstructed in 1 patient and unilateral mass in the remaining 6 patients.
resultsUsing a 3D-printed lateral mass prosthesis, internal fixation was stable for all 7 patients postoperatively. No implant-related complications such as prosthesis loosening, displacement, and compression were observed at the last follow-up.
conclusionReconstruction of the lateral mass structure is beneficial in restoring load transfer in the cervical spine under physiological conditions. A 3D-printed prosthesis can be considered a good option for reconstruction of the lateral mass as fusion was achieved, with no subsequent complications observed.
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.