Article3D printing in medicine2023
Development of 3D printed patient-specific skull implants based on 3d surface scans.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Facial 3D data acquisition in critically ill children for production of personalized non-invasive ventilation masks: a feasibility study.3D printing in medicine · 2025Article
- Application of 3D printing for personalized boluses in radiotherapy: a systematic review.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2025Review
- Noninvasive 3D-head-scan used for 3D-printed customized helm by patient undergoing decompressive hemicraniectomy.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sometimes cranioplasty is necessary to reconstruct skull bone defects after a neurosurgical operation. If an autologous bone is unavailable, alloplastic materials are used. The standard technical approach for the fabrication of cranial implants is based on 3D imaging by computed tomography using the defect and the contralateral site. A new approach uses 3D surface scans, which accurately replicate the curvature of the removed bone flap. For this purpose, the removed bone flap is scanned intraoperatively and digitized accordingly. When using a design procedure developed for this purpose creating a patient-specific implant for each bone flap shape in short time is possible. The designed skull implants have complex free-form surfaces analogous to the curvature of the skull, which is why additive manufacturing is the ideal manufacturing technology here. In this study, we will describe the intraoperative procedure for the acquisition of scanned data and its further processing up to the creation of the implant.
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.