ArticleIndian journal of surgical oncology2025
3D Printing in Orthopedic Oncology - Workflow and Outcomes of 59 Cases.
Article in Indian journal of surgical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reconstruction of a large distal femoral giant cell tumor using a 3D-printed condylar support lattice metal implant and fibular grafts: a novel biomechanical and surgical approach.3D printing in medicine · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of Three-Dimensional Printing in the Management of Orthopedic Sarcoma Patients: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2025Review
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
3D printing has become an integral part of orthopedic oncology. Yet the penetration of this technology is very low owing to a lack of understanding of workflow or early failure due to variables that were not considered during the planning stage. To report preliminary results and pitfalls and describe a workflow based on our experience. This is a descriptive, observation study of 59 cases done by assistance of 3D printing from March 2016 to September 2021. An account of basic workflow, tips, and pitfalls in planning and institutional protocols is described. We categorized and analyzed cases based on clinical parameters such as resection margin, operation time, and blood loss. Several cases that had planning pitfalls also have been identified. Resection via 3D-printed jigs resulted in an average resection margin of 1.2 mm. Operating time was lesser by an average of 25 min (
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.