ArticleClinical case reports2024
Three-dimensional printed model reconstruction in intraoperative use for glass penetrating facial tissue removal.
Article in Clinical case reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Three-dimensional printed model reconstruction in intraoperative use for glass penetrating facial tissue removal.Clinical case reports · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Key Clinical Message: In the anatomically complex terrain of the head and neck, the use of 3D intraoperative models serves as an effective verification tool, determining the size, shape, and number of foreign bodies. This allows the main operator to maximize their capacities for careful wound revision and receive real-time information about the remaining content of the sought-after bodies. Abstract: Penetrating foreign bodies of various origins in the head and neck are uncommon, but potentially hazardous injuries. Complete removal of foreign bodies from soft tissues is essential for optimal healing, minimizing complications, and significantly reducing the risk of the need for reoperation. Despite various technological systems and safeguards available, unintentionally retained surgically placed foreign bodies remain difficult to eliminate completely. A 34-year-old female patient with a cut on the right side of her face who was initially treated with sutures at a general surgical clinic presented for a follow-up examination. A foreign body was verified subcutaneously on the anterior-posterior x-ray image on the right side. Computed tomography confirmed a total of 7 foreign bodies with a density corresponding to dental enamel, distributed subcutaneously, subfascially, and intramuscularly in the right temporal region. As part of the preoperative preparation and analysis, the bone segment of the right temporal fossa with the zygomatic bone and the glass fragments were segmented from the CT data and printed on an SLA printer. The physical 3D models were autoclave sterilized and present during surgery. The position, shape, and number of each individual glass fragment was compared with 3D-printed one. The benefits of producing 3D models of foreign bodies are undeniable, particularly in their perioperative comparison with the removed foreign bodies from wounds.
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.