ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2024
Rapid-printed Three-dimensional Models for Craniomaxillofacial Trauma.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 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.
- Rapid-printed Three-dimensional Models for Craniomaxillofacial Trauma.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Advances in surgical planning and 3-dimensional (3D) printing have benefitted the field of craniomaxillofacial surgery by allowing visualization of patient anatomy in settings of otherwise restricted surgical fields. Long 3D print times limit the usability of surgical planning workflows in acute trauma reconstruction. We sought to identify variables affecting print time and produce rapid-printed models with sufficient quality for prebending osteosynthesis plates. Methods: Three-dimensional printing variables, including resolution, print orientation, and region of interest cropping, were optimized on a single mandibular and midface fracture model to maximize print time efficiency. Five mandibular and 5 midface fractures were printed both in the high-resolution and time-efficient protocol. Fixation plates were contoured to fit the optimized models and computed tomography scan. Distances and volumes between the fracture surface and plate were computed. Results: High-resolution mandible models were printed in 7.47 hours and maxillae in 7.53 hours. Optimized models were printed in 0.93 and 1.07 hours, respectively. Cropping to regions of interest, rotating the model, and decreasing print resolution significantly reduced print time. The difference (optimized versus high resolution) in distance between the plate and model averaged 0.22 and 0.34 mm for mandibles and maxillae; the air space volume differed by 1.39 and 0.90 mm Conclusions: Adjusting size, resolution, and position on the printing platform allows rapid fabrication of 3D models for surgical reconstruction without sacrificing surface quality. These edits reduce printing time, enabling the implementation of 3D-printing workflows for surgical planning in acute craniomaxillofacial trauma settings.
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.