Article3D printing in medicine2025
Intra-hospital patient-specific 3D printed surgical guide for patients with thoracic scoliotic deformities, the collaboration between engineer and surgeon.
Article in 3D printing in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Biocomposite-Based Biomimetic Plate for Alternative Fixation of Proximal Humerus Fractures.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study validates the intra-hospital design and 3D printing process of personalized surgical guides to enhance the accuracy of pedicle screw insertion in patients with thoracic scoliotic deformities. It introduces a novel collaborative paradigm between surgeons and engineers, aiming to improve efficiency and reduce errors in the manufacturing of patient-specific instruments (PSIs).
methodsThe process began with the generation of 3D biomodels of vertebrae from computed tomography scans. Surgical guides were then created using two 3D printing techniques: Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF) with polylactic acid (PLA) and Stereolithography (SLA) with photopolymer resin. Three different prototypes were compared based on multifactorial indicators, including economic cost, macroscopic surface finish, and mechanical stability. The mechanical performance of the guides was evaluated under loads generated during pedicle screw penetration and threading. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS: PLA models printed using FFF were found to be cheaper and simpler to manufacture than SLA resin models. Despite differences observed under a microscope, PLA models exhibited a macroscopic surface finish comparable to that of SLA resin models. Both materials demonstrated similar mechanical properties, although their values were lower than those reported in the manufacturer's datasheet. Importantly, both types of guides successfully withstood the mechanical loads generated during surgical procedures. The intra-hospital collaboration between engineers and surgeons was identified as a key factor in improving outcomes and reducing error risks, showcasing the benefits of interdisciplinary teamwork.
conclusions3D-printed PSIs made from PLA using FFF are more cost-effective and quicker to produce compared to SLA resin models, while achieving similar results in surface finish and mechanical stability. The implementation of a collaborative approach between engineers and surgeons within hospital settings enhances the efficiency and accuracy of patient-specific surgical guide manufacturing, offering a promising solution for improving surgical outcomes in thoracic scoliotic deformities.
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.