ReviewJournal of personalized medicine2022
Personalized Medicine Workflow in Post-Traumatic Orbital Reconstruction.
Review in Journal of personalized medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reconstructive Goals in Arm and Elbow Defects Treated with the Pedicled Latissimus Dorsi Flap.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Article
- Clinical Application of a Multistage Algorithm for Aesthetic and Functional Reconstruction in Post-Traumatic Craniofacial Sequelae.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- Surgical Management of Isolated Zygomaticomaxillary Complex Fractures: Role of Objective Morphometric Analysis in Decision-Making.Craniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction · 2025Review
- Post-Traumatic Orbital Reconstruction Using Titanium Patient-Specific Implants: A Clinical and Radiological Cohort Study Focusing on Paranasal Sinuses Physiology.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Volumetric Assessment of Blow-Out Fractures With Automated Segmentation Benefits Thinner Computed Tomography Slice Thickness: A Retrospective Case-Control Study.The Journal of craniofacial surgeryArticle
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.
Funding
Abstract
Restoration of the orbit is the first and most predictable step in the surgical treatment of orbital fractures. Orbital reconstruction is keyhole surgery performed in a confined space. A technology-supported workflow called computer-assisted surgery (CAS) has become the standard for complex orbital traumatology in many hospitals. CAS technology has catalyzed the incorporation of personalized medicine in orbital reconstruction. The complete workflow consists of diagnostics, planning, surgery and evaluation. Advanced diagnostics and virtual surgical planning are techniques utilized in the preoperative phase to optimally prepare for surgery and adapt the treatment to the patient. Further personalization of the treatment is possible if reconstruction is performed with a patient-specific implant and several design options are available to tailor the implant to individual needs. Intraoperatively, visual appraisal is used to assess the obtained implant position. Surgical navigation, intraoperative imaging, and specific PSI design options are able to enhance feedback in the CAS workflow. Evaluation of the surgical result can be performed both qualitatively and quantitatively. Throughout the entire workflow, the concepts of CAS and personalized medicine are intertwined. A combination of the techniques may be applied in order to achieve the most optimal clinical outcome. The goal of this article is to provide a complete overview of the workflow for post-traumatic orbital reconstruction, with an in-depth description of the available personalization and CAS options.
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.