Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36932284›Full record

Article3D printing in medicine2023

Individualized medicine using 3D printing technology in gynecology: a scoping review.

Carly M Cooke, Teresa E Flaxman, Lindsey Sikora, Olivier Miguel, Sukhbir S Singh

Open access · goldFull text readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in 3D printing in medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Carly M CookeDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Newborn Care, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Teresa E FlaxmanDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Newborn Care, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Lindsey SikoraHealth Sciences Library, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Olivier MiguelDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Sukhbir S SinghDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Newborn Care, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. susingh@toh.ca.
Ottawa Hospital · CAUniversity of Ottawa · CAOttawa Hospital Research Institute

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveDevelopments in 3-dimensional (3D) printing technology has made it possible to produce high quality, affordable 3D printed models for use in medicine. As a result, there is a growing assessment of this approach being published in the medical literature. The objective of this study was to outline the clinical applications of individualized 3D printing in gynecology through a scoping review. DATA SOURCES: Four medical databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, Scopus) and grey literature were searched for publications meeting eligibility criteria up to 31 May 2021. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Publications were included if they were published in English, had a gynecologic context, and involved production of patient specific 3D printed product(s). STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS

methodsStudies were manually screened and assessed for eligibility by two independent reviewers and data were extracted using pre-established criteria using Covidence software.

resultsOverall, 32 studies (15 abstracts,17 full text articles) were included in the scoping review. Most studies were either case reports (12/32,38%) or case series (15/32,47%). Gynecologic sub-specialties in which the 3D printed models were intended for use included: gynecologic oncology (21/32,66%), benign gynecology (6/32,19%), pediatrics (2/32,6%), urogynecology (2/32,6%) and reproductive endocrinology and infertility (1/32,3%). Twenty studies (63%) printed 5 or less models, 6/32 studies (19%) printed greater than 5 (up to 50 models). Types of 3D models printed included: anatomical models (11/32,34%), medical devices, (2/32,6%) and template/guide/cylindrical applicators for brachytherapy (19/32,59%).

conclusionsOur scoping review has outlined novel clinical applications for individualized 3D printed models in gynecology. To date, they have mainly been used for production of patient specific 3D printed brachytherapy guides/applicators in patients with gynecologic cancer. However, individualized 3D printing shows great promise for utility in surgical planning, surgical education, and production of patient specific devices, across gynecologic subspecialties. Evidence supporting the clinical value of individualized 3D printing in gynecology is limited by studies with small sample size and non-standardized reporting, which should be the focus of future studies.

Indexed as

3D printingGynecologyPatient specificScoping review

Identifiers

PMID36932284
PMCPMC10024374
OpenAlexW4327710018

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
reference markers read10
measurements read51
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.