ArticleEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2025
Applications of 3D printing in orthopedics: a scoping review.
Article in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Clinical and functional outcomes of upper extremity 3D-printed immobilization devices compared to traditional methods: a systematic review with limited meta-analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Pooled it
- Efficacy of 3D-printed bone graft container in the treatment of tibial plateau fractures and postoperative rehabilitation prediction model.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Severe trauma care: advances and future directions in diagnostic and therapeutic techniques and information technology support.Medical review (2021) · 2026Article
- Additive Manufacturing in Orthopaedic Trauma: Current Evidence and Applications.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn light of the increasing adoption of 3D printing in clinical practice, this review aims to provide an updated overview of the current applications of 3D printing in orthopedics and identify the gaps in existing literature.
methodsAn electronic database search of PubMed, Embase, Ovid Medline, Cochrane Library, and Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature was performed on 7 April 2023, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines for scoping reviews. The searches were conducted using the keywords relating to "orthopedic" and "three-dimensional printing". No restrictions were placed on the date of publication.
results1333 articles were included in the final synthesis of this review. 6 main themes were identified: surgical planning (57.01%), implants (28.73%), prostheses (5.03%), surgical training and education (4.20%), orthosis (3.98%) and patient education (1.05%). Specialties that commonly used 3D printing included trauma, spine, and adult reconstruction. Common anatomical sites included the pelvis, spine, and knee. Titanium was the most used material, followed by polylactic acid and resin. Titanium was predominantly used in 3D-printed implants while polylactic acid and resin were predominantly used during surgical planning. There was a paucity of literature on legal and economic papers.
conclusionExisting literature demonstrates the growing applications of 3D printing in orthopedics with the potential for it to address the needs of low-income countries, improve patient outcomes, and enhance surgical practices. However, further research is needed to explore the clinical, and economic aspects and optimization of workflow to establish 3D printing as a standard of care in orthopedics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40884598What 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.