ReviewCraniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction2024
In-House Virtual Surgery Planning and 3D Printing for Head and Neck Surgery With Free Software: Our Workflow.
Review in Craniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07079111 (3D Printed Occlusal Splints for Intraoperative Use), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
3D Printed Occlusal Splints for Intraoperative Use
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Three-Dimensional Printing in Pediatric Orthopaedics: Cost Analysis and Emerging Applications.Journal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America · 2026Review
- Applications of 3D Printing and Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare Management: A Narrative Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- In-House Three-Dimensional Printing in Orbital Reconstructive Surgery: A Case Report and Future Perspectives.Cureus · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Study Design: This study explores the workflow of in-house computer-aided design/manufacturing (CAD/CAM) in head and neck oncologic surgery, focusing on 3D printing of biomodels and cutting guides. Objective: We aim to describe a validated workflow for an in-house 3D Printing Department within a level III University Hospital of the Spanish Public Health System using free software. Methods: Our study outlines a cost-effective and time-efficient workflow utilizing free software for 3D printing. We assess the feasibility of establishing an in-house department compared to outsourcing to the biomedical industry. Results: The study demonstrates that creating an in-house 3D Printing Department in a hospital setting is a viable option. We discuss the advantages, including cost savings and reduced lead times, as well as the limitations of this approach. Conclusions: In conclusion, establishing an in-house 3D Printing Department has the potential to significantly streamline complex head and neck oncologic surgery procedures. This approach can enhance accessibility to advanced CAD/CAM, making them more efficient and cost-effective within the healthcare system.
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.