ReviewUnfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany)2025
[3D printing/implants in traumatology].
Review in Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of 3D printing offers numerous application possibilities in traumatology, including anatomic models, repositioning and drilling guides as well as patient-specific implants. The greatest challenge lies in the rapid availability as many procedures require an immediate intervention. Anatomic models support surgical planning by complementing visual impressions with tactile ones. Printed models not only help in the establishment of surgical strategies but also enhance patient clarification. Studies demonstrate that these models significantly reduce the operating time, duration of fluoroscopy and blood loss, particularly for joint fractures. Repositioning and drilling guides simplify complex procedures and improve outcomes; however, they require precise planning and critical evaluation by the surgeon. Intraoperative guides are helpful, for instance, in accurately placing screws, especially in difficult to access areas or in metaphyseal fractures lacking clear references. Individualized implants play a lesser role in acute care but are useful for posttraumatic defects or corrective osteotomy. In the conservative segment, such as customized splints, 3D printing is being tested but with mixed results. Key requirements for 3D printing in traumatology include high-resolution computed tomography (CT), precise data processing and swift production. Regulatory hurdles and lack of reimbursement currently limit the widespread use. An optimized collaboration between technology and medicine, along with standardized processes, are essential for effectively integrating this technology into practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40064703What 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.