ArticleCureus2025
Realistic 3D-Printed Lumbar Spine Model for Non-cadaveric Surgical Training: A Proof of Concept Study.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of temperature and humidity on the structural and biocompatibility of 3D-Printed PLA scaffolds for bone regeneration.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Three-Dimensional Printing of a Spinal Interbody: Design Principles, Biomaterials, and Translational Considerations.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
- Closed-Loop digital therapeutics empowered by deep reinforcement learning and wearable sensing for precision orthopedic rehabilitation: a simulation-based proof-of-concept study.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2026Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Surgical simulation plays a crucial role in modern neurosurgical training, allowing surgeons to develop and refine their skills in a controlled and risk-free environment. Traditional methods, such as cadaveric dissections, and virtual reality (VR) simulations more recently have their advantages and limitations. While cadaveric models offer high anatomical accuracy, they are expensive, difficult to access, and non-reusable. VR simulations provide customizable training experiences but lack the realistic haptic feedback necessary for hands-on procedures. With advancements in 3D printing technology, anatomically accurate and cost-effective physical models have emerged as a viable alternative for surgical training. This study aims to develop and validate a realistic 3D-printed lumbar spine model for non-cadaveric surgical education. The proposed model replicates the anatomical and biomechanical properties of the L1-S1 segment and is produced using fused deposition modeling (FDM) 3D printing technology with polylactic acid (PLA) vertebrae, PolyFlex TPU95 intervertebral discs, and an elastic TPU (thermoplastic polyurethane) rod to mimic physiological movement. The model is based on DICOM imaging data from a CT scan of a patient's spine, optimized for biomechanical resistance and realistic pedicle screw placement training. It was tested in hands-on neurosurgical workshops at St. Ivan Rilski University Hospital in Sofia. Post-training X-ray analysis confirmed the accuracy of screw positioning and the anatomical fidelity of the model. The results demonstrate that this 3D-printed lumbar spine model provides an accessible, customizable, and reliable training tool for spine surgery. Future improvements may include multi-material printing, augmented reality (AR) integration, and adaptations for pathological conditions.
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.