Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35312794›Full record

ReviewDer Unfallchirurg2022

[Update on 3D printing in the surgery of musculoskeletal tumors].

Mohamed Omar, Martin Schulze, Nico Bruns, Daniel Kotrych, Georg Gosheger, Max Ettinger

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Unfallchirurg, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

6 authors.

Mohamed OmarKlinik für Unfallchirurgie, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Deutschland. omar.mohamed@mh-hannover.de.
Martin SchulzeKlinik für Allgemeine Orthopädie und Tumororthopädie, Universitätsklinikum Münster, Albert-Schweitzer Campus 1, 48149, Münster, Deutschland.
Nico BrunsKlinik für Unfallchirurgie, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Deutschland.
Daniel KotrychKlinik für Allgemeine Orthopädie und Tumororthopädie, Universitätsklinikum Münster, Albert-Schweitzer Campus 1, 48149, Münster, Deutschland.
Georg GoshegerKlinik für Allgemeine Orthopädie und Tumororthopädie, Universitätsklinikum Münster, Albert-Schweitzer Campus 1, 48149, Münster, Deutschland.
Max EttingerOrthopädische Klinik, DIAKOVERE, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Hannover, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The importance of 3D printing applications in the surgery of musculoskeletal tumors has increased in recent years. Even prior to the era of 3D printing, computer-assisted techniques, such as navigation, have proved their utility. Due to the variable appearance of bone tumors, there is a need for individual solutions. The 3D printing can be used for the development of anatomical demonstration models, the construction of patient-specific instruments and custom-made implants. For these three applications, different regulatory hurdles exist. Especially for the resection of pelvic tumors, 3D printing technologies seem to provide advantages due to the complicated anatomy and the proximity to relevant neurovascular structures. With the introduction of titanium printing, construction of individualized implants that fit exactly into the defect became feasible.

Indexed as

Bone NeoplasmsMusculoskeletal DiseasesHumansModels, AnatomicPrinting, Three-DimensionalProstheses and ImplantsPatient-specific modelingProstheses and implantsSarcomaSurgical navigation systemsTitanium

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.