ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2025
3D printing technology is a more accurate tool than an experienced surgeon in performing femoral bone tunnels in multi-ligament knee injuries.
Article in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 2025. 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.
- Advances in 3D Printing Applications for Personalized Orthopedic Surgery: From Anatomical Modeling to Patient-Specific Implants.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- 3D printing technology is a more accurate tool than an experienced surgeon in performing femoral bone tunnels in multi-ligament knee injuries.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Current surgical methods for multi-ligament knee reconstruction involve the creation of several reconstruction tunnels in the distal femur. However, the limited bone mass in the knee increases the risk of tunnel convergence. Increasing the accuracy of tunnel direction can minimize tunnel collision during anatomical reconstruction. 3D-printed patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) has gained prominence in orthopaedic surgery due to its precision. This study aims to compare the accuracy of PSI with that of the 'freehand' approach by an experienced surgeon for drilling the medial and lateral femoral tunnels while adhering to the recommended angulations for multi-ligament knee injuries. Methods: Ten cadaveric knees underwent computerized tomography (CT) scans to identify anatomical femoral attachments of the lateral collateral ligament (LCL), popliteal tendon (PT), medial collateral ligament (MCL) and posterior oblique ligament (POL). Using Materialise Mimics Medical v25.0 software, virtual planning of a bone tunnel for each ligament was performed, and a total of four tunnels per knee were obtained. Ten PSIs were designed for five knees: five for the medial side and five for the lateral side. The first five knees were operated on via PSI, and the other five knees were operated on by an experienced surgeon using freehand drilling based on preoperative plans. The angular deviation and entry point were assessed by overlaying post-operative CT images onto preoperative CT images. Results: In the freehand group, the median angular deviation was 22.3°, with an interquartile range (IQR) of 17.6-25.2°. The PSI group presented a significantly greater accuracy in angular deviation for femoral tunnels of 5.7°, with an IQR of 4-8.2° ( Conclusions: Compared with the freehand technique performed by an experienced surgeon, PSI demonstrated significantly greater accuracy in terms of the mean angular deviation. Level of Evidence: Level V.
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.