Trial reportActa orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica2022
Patient-specific three-dimensional printing spine model for surgical planning in AO spine type-C fracture posterior long-segment fixation.
Trial report in Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of surgery simulation using a 3-dimensional printed model on outcomes of hallux valgus surgery with distal chevron osteotomy: A randomized controlled trial.Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica · 2024Trial
- Facet tropism is not associated with lumbar spondylolysis: a computed tomography-based three-dimensional morphometric case-control study.Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica · 2026Article
- Conservative Management of a Symptomatic Anterior Limbus Vertebra in a Non-athletic Patient: A Case Report.Cureus · 2026Article
- Review
- Patient-Specific 3D-Printed Reference Rod for "Smiley Face Rod" Repair of Lumbar Spondylolysis in a Patient with High Body Mass Index.Spine surgery and related research · 2026Article
- 3D Digital Anatomical Models Based on Computed Tomographic Morphometric Analysis of C1 and C2 for Surgical Navigation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- 3D printing in medicine: bridging imaging, education, and practice.Archives of medical sciences. Atherosclerotic diseases · 2025Article
- Applying a three-dimensional curved lumbar spine model to simulate surgery for training residents in pedicle screw insertion.Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA · 2024Article
- Bibliometric analysis of the Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica from 2013 to 2022.Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica · 2024Article
- Low-Cost 3D Models for Cervical Spine Tumor Removal Training for Neurosurgery Residents.Brain sciences · 2024Article
- Review
- Recent advances of 3D-printing in spine surgery.Surgical neurology international · 2024Review
- Current applications of 3-dimensional printing in spine surgery.Journal of orthopaedics · 2023Article
- Application of 3-dimensional printing technology in the treatment of postoperative nonunion of femoral neck fracture: A case report.Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica · 2023Article
- 3D printing in spine care: A review of current applications.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2022Article
- Virtual Scoliosis Surgery Using a 3D-Printed Model Based on Biplanar Radiographs.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Thoracic Pedicle Screw Placement Utilizing Hands-On Training Session on Three-Dimensional Models.Cureus · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to compare duration of surgery, intraoperative fluoroscopy exposure, blood loss and the accuracy of pedicular screw placement between 3D model-assisted surgery and conventional surgery for AO spinal C-type injuries.
methodsIn this study 32 patients who were admitted with thoracolumbar AO spinal C-type injuries were included. These patients were divided randomly into two groups of 16 where one group was operated on using conventional surgery and the other group was operated on using 3D model-assisted surgery. During surgery, instrumentation time, amount of blood loss and intraoperative fluoroscopy exposure were recorded. Moreover, the status of the screws in the pedicles was assessed as described by Learch and Wiesner's and regional sagittal angles (RSA) were measured preop and postoperatively.
resultsIt was found that there was a statistically significant difference in instrumentation time, blood loss and intraoperative fluoroscopy exposure in the 3D model-assisted surgery group (61.9 ± 4.7 min, 268.4 ± 42.7 ml, 16.3 ± 1.9 times) compared to the conventional surgery group (75.5 ± 11.0 min, 347.8 ± 52.2 mL, 19.7 ± 2.4 times) (t=4.5325, P < 0.0001 and t=4.7109, P < 0.0001 and t=4.4937, P < 0.0001, respectively) Although the screw misplacement rate of the conventional surgery group was higher than that of the 3D model-assisted surgery group, the only statistically significant difference was in the medial axial encroachment (t=5.101 P=0.02) . There was no severe misplacement of pedicle screws in either group. There were no statistically significant differences between postoperative RSA angles and were in both groups restored significantly.
conclusionThe results of this study have shown us that the 3D model helps surgeons see patients' pathoanatomy and determine rod lengths, pedicle screw angles and lengths preoperatively and peroparatively, which in turn shortens operative time, reduces blood loss and fluoroscopy exposure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, Therapeutic Study.
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.