ArticleInternational orthopaedics2023
Impact of three-dimensional printed planning in Paprosky III acetabular defects: a case-control and cost-comparison analysis.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Applications of "In-Hospital" 3D Printing in Hip Surgery: A Systematic Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe main challenges in revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) are the treatment of the bone loss and the pre-operative planning. 3D-printed models may enhance pre-operative planning. The aim of the study is to compare the intra- and peri-operative results and costs for Paprosky type 3 rTHAs planned with 3D-printed models to ones accomplished with the conventional imaging techniques (X-rays and CT scan).
methodsSeventy-two patients with Paprosky type 3 defect underwent rTHA between 2014 and 2021. Fifty-two patients were treated with standard planning and 20 were planned on 3D-printed models. Surgical time, intra-operative blood loss, number of transfused blood units, number of post-operative days of hospitalization, and use of acetabular rings were compared between the two groups. A costs comparison was also performed.
resultsThe 3D-printed group showed reduced operative time (101.8 min (SD 27.7) vs. 146.1 min (SD 49.5), p < 0.001) and total days of hospitalization (9.3 days (SD 3.01) vs. 12.3 days (SD 6.01), p = 0.009). The cost of the procedures was significantly lower than the control group, with an adjusted difference of 4183 euros (p = 0.004). No significant differences were found for the number of total transfused blood units and blood loss and the number of acetabular rings.
conclusionThe use of 3D-printed models led to a meaningful cost saving. The 3D-printed pre-operative planning for complex rTHAs seems to be effective in reducing operating time, hospital stay and overall costs.
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.