Article3D printing and additive manufacturing2023
A Novel Approach of Customized Pelvic Implant Design Based on Symmetrical Analysis and 3D Printing.
Article in 3D printing and additive manufacturing, 2023. 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.
- Practical 3D Reconstruction and 3D Printing of Veterinary CT Scans in Small Animals: A Technical Demonstration with Reader-Based Validation in Canine Cranial Trauma.Veterinary sciences · 2026Article
- Three-dimensional assisted techniques vs. conventional fixation in complex periarticular fractures: a systematic review of outcomes and complications.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- Clinical Workflow Algorithm for Preoperative Planning, Reduction and Stabilization of Complex Acetabular Fractures with the Support of Three-Dimensional Technologies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Comparison of 2 open-sourced 3-dimensional modeling techniques for orthopaedic application.OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In pelvic trauma patients, the mismatch of complex geometries between the pelvis and fixation implant is a fundamental cause of unstable and displaced pelvic ring disruption, in which secondary intervention is strongly considered. The geometrical matching in the current customized implant design and clinical practice is through the nonfractured hemi-pelvis for the fractured pelvis. This design philosophy overlooks the anatomical difference between the hemipelves, and further, the geometrical asymmetry at local area still remains unknown. This study analyzed the anatomical asymmetry of a patient's 3D pelvic models from 13 patients. The hemipelves of each patient were registered by using an iterative closet algorithm to an optimum position with minimum deviations. The high deviation regions were summarized between the hemipelves in each case, and a color map was drawn on a hemipelvis model that identified the areas that had a high possibility to be symmetrically different. A severe pelvic trauma case was used to comprehend the approach by designing a 3D printed implant. Each fracture was then registered to the mirrored uninjured hemipelvis by using the same algorithm, and customized fixation implants were designed with reference to the fractured model. The customized fixation plates showed that the implants had lower geometrical deviation when attached onto the re-stitched fracture side than onto the mirrored nonfractured bone. These results indicate that the symmetrical analysis of bone anatomy and the deviation color map can assist with implant selection and customized implant design given the geometrical difference between symmetrical bones. The novel approach provides a scientific reference that improves the accuracy and overall standard of 3D printed implants.
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.