ArticleScientific reports2023
Custom-made 3D printing-based cranioplasty using a silicone mould and PMMA.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06782711 (Efficacy and Safety of Customized Skull Implants Made of Polyetheretheretherketone Using Three-dimensional Printing in Patients Undergoing Cranioplasty), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 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.
Efficacy and Safety of Customized Skull Implants Made of Polyetheretheretherketone Using Three-dimensional Printing in Patients Undergoing Cranioplasty
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative Safety and Efficacy of Patient-Specific Versus Hand-Molded Implants in Cranioplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- 3-Dimensional printing and bioprinting in neurological sciences: applications in surgery, imaging, tissue engineering, and pharmacology and therapeutics.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2025Review
- Personalized 3D-printed cranial implants for complex cranioplasty using open-source software.Surgical neurology international · 2024Article
- Cranial Defect Repair With 3D Designed Models.Biomedical engineering and computational biology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
All types of cranioplasty techniques restore the morphology of the skull and affect patient aesthetics. Safe and easy techniques are required to enhance patients' recovery and the rehabilitation process. We propose a new method of cranioplasty. The 3-dimensional (3D) reconstruction of a thin-layer computed tomography (CT) scan of the skull was used to reflect the intact side onto the defect and subtract the overlapping points from one another. In this way, a 3D model of the planned implant can be built in the required shape and size. The precise fit of the implant can be checked by printing the defective part of the skull in case it can be modified. A sterilisable silicone mould based on the finalized model was created afterwards. Polymethyl methacrylate implants were prepared directly in an aseptic environment in the operating room during surgery. Between 2005 and 2020, we performed 54 cranioplasties on 52 patients whose craniotomies were performed previously for indications of traumatic brain injury, stroke or tumour surgeries. No technical problems were noted during the operations. In 2 cases, septic complications that occurred were not connected to the technique itself, and the implants were removed and later replaced. Our proposed technique based on 3D-printed individual silicone moulds is a reliable, safe, easily reproducible and low-cost method to repair different skull defects.
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.