ArticleJournal of functional biomaterials2025
Personalized 3D-Printed Prostheses for Bone Defect Reconstruction After Tumor Resection in the Foot and Ankle.
Article in Journal of functional biomaterials, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Porous Ti-6Al-4V Architectures in Load-Bearing Orthopedic Reconstruction: A Critical Narrative Review of the Translational Gap Across Microstructure, Fatigue, Surface Function, and Clinical Failure Modes.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Research Progress on the Structure and Properties of Medical Bone Implants Based on Additive Manufacturing.Micromachines · 2026Review
- Patient-specific Distal Tibia Prosthesis for Reconstruction in a Case of Recurrent Giant Cell Tumor - A Case Report.Journal of orthopaedic case reports · 2026Article
- Patient-Specific Lattice Implants for Segmental Femoral and Tibial Reconstruction (Part 2): CT-Based Personalization, Design Workflows and Validation-A Review.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Causal association between inflammatory markers and malignant neoplasms of bone and articular cartilage using Mendelian randomization.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Functional Biomaterials: Scaffolds for Innovative Treatments.Journal of functional biomaterials · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Three-dimensional (3D)-printing technology is revolutionizing orthopedic oncology by providing precise, customized solutions for complex bone defects following tumor resection. Traditional modular endoprostheses are prone to complications such as fretting corrosion and implant failure, underscoring the need for innovative approaches. This case series reports on three patients treated with 3D-printed, patient-specific prostheses and cutting guides. Preoperative CT and MRI data were used to design implants tailored to each patient's anatomy, manufactured using electron beam melting technology with a titanium-aluminum-vanadium alloy. Functional outcomes showed significant improvements: in Case I, AOFAS improved from 71 to 96, and VAS decreased from 6 to 1; in Case II, AOFAS increased from 65 to 79, and VAS decreased from 5 to 3. Radiographic evaluations demonstrated stable prosthesis placement and early evidence of bone integration in Cases I and II, while in Case III, localized disease control was achieved before systemic progression. This case series highlights the transformative potential of 3D-printed prostheses in addressing the challenges of reconstructing anatomically complex defects. By enabling precise tumor resection and improving functional outcomes, this approach can advance current practices in orthopedic oncology. Further research should explore larger cohorts and use cost-effectiveness analyses to validate these findings and facilitate broader clinical adoption.
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.