Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36611568›Full record

ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2022

3D Printing in Otolaryngology Surgery: Descriptive Review of Literature to Define the State of the Art.

Federica Zoccali, Andrea Colizza, Fabrizio Cialente, Arianna Di Stadio, Ignazio La Mantia, Charlie Hanna, Antonio Minni, Massimo Ralli, Antonio Greco, Marco de Vincentiis

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Trends in Preoperative Airway Assessment.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. 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

10 authors.

Federica ZoccaliDepartment of Sense Organs, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-5481-4307
Andrea ColizzaDepartment of Sense Organs, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-0639-806X
Fabrizio CialenteDepartment of Sense Organs, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8776-1018
Arianna Di StadioDepartment GF Ingrassia, University of Catania, Via di Santa Sofia 78, 95125 Catania, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-5510-3814
Ignazio La MantiaDepartment GF Ingrassia, University of Catania, Via di Santa Sofia 78, 95125 Catania, Italy.
Charlie HannaFaculty of Medicine and Medical Sciences, Holy Spirit University of Kaslik (USEK), Jounieh 1200, Lebanon.
Antonio MinniDepartment of Sense Organs, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy.
Massimo RalliDepartment of Sense Organs, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-8776-0421
Antonio GrecoDepartment of Sense Organs, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-4824-9871
Marco de VincentiisDepartment of Sense Organs, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThree-dimensional (3D) printing has allowed great progression in the medical field. In otolaryngology practice, 3D printing can be used for planning in case of malformation/complex surgery, for surgeon training, and for recreating missing tissues. This systematic review aimed to summarize the current benefits and the possible future application of 3D technologies in the otolaryngology field.

methodsA systematic review of articles that discuss the use of 3D printing in the otolaryngology field was performed. All publications without the restriction of time and that were published by December 2021 in the English language were included. Searches were performed in the PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Embase databases. Keywords used were: "3D printing", "bioprinting", "three-dimensional printing", "tissue engineering" in combination with the terms: "head and neck surgery", "head and neck reconstruction", "otology", "rhinology", "laryngology", and "otolaryngology".

resultsNinety-one articles were included in this systematic review. The articles describe the clinical application of 3D printing in different fields of otolaryngology, from otology to pediatric otolaryngology. The main uses of 3D printing technology discussed in the articles included in the review were surgical planning in temporal bone malformation, the reconstruction of missing body parts after oncologic surgery, allowing for medical training, and providing better information to patients.

conclusionThe use of 3D printing in otolaryngology practice is constantly growing. However, available evidence is still limited, and further studies are needed to better evaluate the benefits of this technology.

Indexed as

3D printingbioprintingotorhinolaryngology-ENT surgery applicationsrapid prototyping

Identifiers

PMID36611568
PMCPMC9819565

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.