ArticleNeurosurgical review2025
3D-printed models in atlantoaxial surgery training: a comparative study and questionnaire survey.
Article in Neurosurgical review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Surgical training in the subspecialty of atlantoaxial procedures presents a significant challenge, yet research in this field is notably scarce. Trainees face considerable obstacles due to the limited number of cases available for hands-on experience and the inherent complexity of these surgeries. In an effort to enhance medical education, we explore the potential of three-dimensional (3D) printing technology to create customized, high-fidelity anatomical models. This study aims to illustrate the invaluable role of 3D-printed models in atlantoaxial surgery training. This study involved a comprehensive approach, combining didactic lectures on anatomical and surgical principles, hands-on learning with meticulously crafted custom 3D-printed models, and practical exercises utilizing cadaveric specimens. We assessed participants' pre-lecture and post-course performance through quizzes and self-assessment. Additionally, we administered a questionnaire to gauge participant perspectives on the utility of the personalized models. All participants were randomly assigned to either the study group, which received custom 3D-printed models in advance, or the control group. Our study enlisted a total of 27 highly experienced spine surgeons. Significantly, the study group demonstrated substantial improvement in post-course quiz scores (3.15 ± 0.22 vs. 2.07 ± 0.45, p = 0.044), with particular enhancements noted in the anatomy Sect. (1.54 ± 0.18 vs. 0.93 ± 0.29, p = 0.09). A vast majority of participants (24 out of 27) acknowledged that the 3D-printed models significantly aided their comprehension of atlantoaxial anatomy, while 21 out of 27 participants credited the models with improving their understanding of atlantoaxial surgical techniques. 3D-printed models may serve as a useful adjunct in training for atlantoaxial surgery by improving anatomical understanding and trainee confidence. Although promising, the findings are preliminary and limited by the small sample size and subjective assessments, warranting further large-scale validation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41392236What 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.