Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37284965›Full record

Article3D printing in medicine2023

3D Printed Orthopaedic External Fixation Devices: A Systematic Review.

Hunter A O'Connor, Luke W Adams, Lisa N MacFadden, Nathan Wm Skelley

Open access · goldAbstract read
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 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. [3D printing/implants in traumatology].Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. In-vitro external fixation pin-site model proof of concept: A novel approach to studying wound healing in transcutaneous implants.Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part H, Journal of engineering in medicine · 2024
    Article
  9. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hunter A O'ConnorUniversity of South Dakota Sanford School of Medicine, Sioux Falls, SD, 57104, USA.
Luke W AdamsSanford Orthopedics and Sports Medicine, 1210 W. 18th St, Sioux Falls, SD, 57104, USA.
Lisa N MacFaddenUniversity of South Dakota Sanford School of Medicine, Sioux Falls, SD, 57104, USA.
Nathan Wm SkelleyUniversity of South Dakota Sanford School of Medicine, Sioux Falls, SD, 57104, USA. nathan.skelley@sanfordhealth.org.
University of South Dakota · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExternal fixators are complex, expensive orthopaedic devices used to stabilize high-energy and complex fractures of the extremities. Although the technology has advanced dramatically over the last several decades, the mechanical goals for fracture stabilization of these devices have remained unchanged. Three-dimensional (3D) printing technology has the potential to advance the practice and access to external fixation devices in orthopaedics. This publication aims to systematically review and synthesize the current literature on 3D printed external fixation devices for managing orthopaedic trauma fractures.

methodsThe Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) protocols were followed for this manuscript with minor exceptions. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Review, Google Scholar, and Scopus online databases were systematically searched. Two independent reviewers screened the search results based on predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria related to 3D printing and external fixation of fractures.

resultsNine studies met the inclusion criteria. These included one mechanical testing study, two computational simulation studies, three feasibility studies, and three clinical case studies. Fixator designs and materials varied significantly between authors. Mechanical testing revealed similar strength to traditional metal external fixators. Across all clinical studies, five patients underwent definitive treatment with 3D printed external fixators. They all had satisfactory reduction and healing with no reported complications.

conclusionsThe current literature on this topic is heterogeneous, with highly variable external fixator designs and testing techniques. A small and limited number of studies in the scientific literature have analyzed the use of 3D printing in this area of orthopaedic surgery. 3D printed external fixation design advancements have yielded promising results in several small clinical case studies. However, additional studies on a larger scale with standardized testing and reporting techniques are needed.

Indexed as

3-dimensional printing3D printingExternal fixationFractureOrthopaedicsOrthopedicsStabilizationTrauma

Identifiers

PMID37284965
PMCPMC10246364
OpenAlexW4379599915

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.