ReviewTaiwan journal of ophthalmology
Patient-specific implants for orbital fracture surgery.
Review in Taiwan journal of ophthalmology. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Orbital wall fractures are among the most common maxillofacial injuries and require precise reconstruction to restore orbital volume, prevent diplopia, and avoid long-term sequelae such as enophthalmos or facial asymmetry. Traditional reconstruction techniques have relied on autologous grafts and preformed alloplastic implants; however, these approaches are limited by intraoperative variability, imprecise contour restoration, and increased operative time. Over the past decade, the emergence of patient-specific implants (PSIs), designed through advanced three-dimensional (3D) imaging, computer-aided design, and computer-aided manufacturing, has transformed the field of orbital reconstruction. PSIs allow highly accurate anatomical restoration, reduce intraoperative manipulation, and improve clinical outcomes. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the evolution of orbital fracture reconstruction, design and fabrication principles of PSIs, clinical evidence supporting their use, limitations, and future directions, including bioactive materials, artificial intelligence-driven design, and point-of-care 3D printing.
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.