Article3D printing in medicine2024
The feasibility of a novel 3D-Printed patient specific cutting guide for extended trochanteric osteotomies.
Article in 3D printing in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multi-Site evaluation of a novel point-of-care 3D printing quality assurance protocol for a material jetting 3D printer.3D printing in medicine · 2025Article
- The Use of 3D Printing as an Educational Tool in Orthopaedics.JB & JS open accessReview
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe extended trochanteric osteotomy (ETO) is a surgical technique utilized to expose the intramedullary canal of the proximal femur, protect the soft tissues and promote reliable healing. However, imprecise execution of the osteotomy can lead to fracture, soft tissue injury, non-union, and unnecessary morbidity. We developed a technique to create patient specific, 3D-printed cutting guides to aid in accurate positioning of the ETO and improve osteotomy quality and outcomes.
methodsPatient specific cutting guides were created based on CT scans using Synopysis Simpleware ScanIP and Solidworks. Custom 3D printed cutting guides were tested on synthetic femurs with foam cortical shells and on cadaveric femurs. To confirm accuracy of the osteotomies, dimensions of the performed osteotomies were compared to the virtually planned osteotomies.
resultsUse of the patient specific ETO cutting guides resulted in successful osteotomies, exposing the femoral canal and the femoral stem both in synthetic sawbone and cadaveric testing. In cadaveric testing, the guides allowed for osteotomies without fracture and cuts made using the guide were accurate within 6 percent error from the virtually planned osteotomy.
conclusionThe 3D-printed patient specific cutting guides used to aid in ETOs proved to be accurate. Through the iterative development of cutting guides, we found that a simple design was key to a reliable and accurate guide. While future clinical trials in human subjects are needed, we believe our custom 3D printed cutting guide design to be effective at aiding in performing ETOs for revision total hip arthroplasty surgeries.
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.