SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2025
From visualization to education: the role of 3D-Printed and virtual kidney models in training for renal cancer surgery, a systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of robotic surgery, 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.
- Use of 3D-Printed Models and Augmented Reality in Medical Student Education of Congenital Heart Disease: Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR medical education · 2026Trial
- 3D intelligent printing technology-assisted training improves core competencies of clinical medicine interns: bridging undergraduate further education and community health service needs.Frontiers in public health · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This systematic review on novel 3D technologies aims to discuss the current evidence on the usefulness of 3D printing, virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) simulators in the education and training of young urologists for kidney cancer surgery, highlighting the modalities employed, their educational impact, and areas for future development. We performed a comprehensive literature search limited to the last 10 years across PubMed and Embase libraries, identifying studies evaluating the use of 3D technologies as educational tools in urologist training for kidney cancer surgery. The review followed PRISMA guidelines, and two reviewers independently screened eligible studies. We extracted data on study designs and on urologists' education outcomes, through different subcategories. Seventeen studies were included, mostly small-scale validation or descriptive investigations. Twelve investigated 3D-printed models and five VR/AR platforms. Simulations focused on laparoscopic and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy, often using patient-specific models for rehearsal and skill development. Training outcomes included improved spatial anatomy understanding, increased technical performance, greater procedural confidence, and enhanced familiarity with complex surgical steps. However, considerable heterogeneity in methodology and limited sample sizes across studies underscore the need for standardized evaluation of these educational tools. 3D technologies, including 3D-printed models and VR/AR platforms, show promise in enhancing surgical training for renal cancer by improving anatomical understanding and procedural skills. These technologies demonstrate good precision and can help assess trainee surgical skill. However, evidence remains limited, and further research is needed to validate their effectiveness, cost-efficiency, and integration into standardized urological training curricula.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41345321What 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.