ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2024
Patient specific instrumentation in ACL reconstruction: a proof-of-concept cadaver experiment assessing drilling accuracy when using 3D printed guides.
Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Consistency of Subcortical Osseous Structures in Femoral Cruciate Ligament Attachment Sites: A Combined 3D-CT and Histological Anatomical Study.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Article
- Anterior Cruciate Ligament Rupture: Evidence-Based Concepts on Reconstruction, Repair and Future Developments.Cureus · 2024Review
- A comparative study on 3D printing-assisted arthroscopic IDEAL point femoral tunnel positioning for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction versus conventional arthroscopic positioning.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Article
- Augmented Reality With Dynamic Anatomy Modelling for Knee Arthroscopy.Healthcare technology lettersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionAccurate positioning of the femoral tunnel in ACL reconstruction is of the utmost importance to reduce the risk of graft failure. Limited visibility during arthroscopy and a wide anatomical variance attribute to femoral tunnel malposition using conventional surgical techniques. The purpose of this study was to determine whether a patient specific 3D printed surgical guide allows for in vitro femoral tunnel positioning within 2 mm of the planned tunnel position. MATERIALS AND
methodsA patient specific guide for femoral tunnel positioning in ACL reconstruction was created for four human cadaveric knee specimens based on routine clinical MRI data. Fitting properties were judged by two orthopedic surgeons. MRI scanning was performed both pre- and post-procedure. The planned tunnel endpoint was compared to the actual drilled femoral tunnel.
resultsThis patient specific 3D printed guide showed a mean deviation of 5.0 mm from the center of the planned femoral ACL origin.
conclusionIn search to improve accuracy and consistency of femoral tunnel positioning in ACL reconstruction, the use of a patient specific 3D printed surgical guide is a viable option to explore further. The results are comparable to those of conventional techniques; however, further design improvements are necessary to improve accuracy and enhance reproducibility.
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.