ReviewFrontiers in medicine2025
Three-dimensional printing in modern orthopedic trauma surgery: a comprehensive analysis of technical evolution and clinical translation.
Review in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Clinical Application of FDM 3D Printing in Surgery and Traumatology: A Systematic Review.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Pooled it
- Efficacy of the use of 3D printing models in the treatment of tibial plateau fractures: a pilot randomized clinical trial.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Trial
- Three-Dimensional-guided osteotomy and reconstruction of malunited pediatric capitellum fractures: a report of 2 cases.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2026Article
- Review
- Efficacy of 3D-printed bone graft container in the treatment of tibial plateau fractures and postoperative rehabilitation prediction model.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Additive Manufacturing in Orthopaedic Trauma: Current Evidence and Applications.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Three-dimensional (3D) printing has emerged as a transformative technology in orthopedic trauma surgery, offering unprecedented possibilities for personalized surgical solutions. Despite its increasing adoption, there remains a lack of comprehensive reviews systematically evaluating its technical considerations and evidence-based outcomes across different anatomical regions. Through systematic review of literature from major databases and analysis of clinical evidence, this comprehensive review examines the current state of advanced 3D printing technologies in orthopedic trauma. We analyze four major additive manufacturing methodologies: vat photopolymerization for surgical guides, material extrusion for anatomical models, powder bed fusion for implants, and emerging bioprinting approaches. The integration of these technologies has substantially improved surgical outcomes through three primary approaches: preoperative planning with anatomical modeling, intraoperative guidance using custom surgical guides, and patient-specific implant solutions. Systematic analysis demonstrates significant improvements in surgical precision, operative efficiency, and anatomical restoration across various fracture patterns. While challenges in manufacturing protocols, quality control standards, and regulatory frameworks persist, ongoing innovations in materials science, digital workflow optimization, and clinical validation continue to expand the applications. This review provides a systematic framework integrating technical principles and clinical applications of 3D printing in orthopedic trauma surgery, offering practical guidelines while highlighting future research directions.
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.