Article3D printing in medicine2026
3D printed and virtual kidney models as learning tools to improve anatomical and spatial understanding of renal tumors: a pilot educational study (Rein-3D print students - UroCCR 219).
Article in 3D printing in medicine, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRadiological training is often underrepresented in medical education, despite its essential role in clinical practice. Innovations like 3D printing offer detailed anatomical models that enhance understanding. In kidney cancer management, imaging and tumor complexity scores are crucial. This study evaluated whether three-dimensional (3D) kidney models could improve medical students' anatomical and spatial understanding of renal tumors, as assessed through CT-based complexity scoring.
methodsThree kidney tumor cases of varying complexity were selected. CT scans were segmented using Synapse 3D
resultsThe 3DV and 3DP groups showed significantly greater accuracy in completing complexity scores (91% [IQR 82-91] and 91% [IQR 73-100]) than the CT-only group (73% [IQR 64-82], p < 0.05), reflecting improved spatial understanding of renal anatomy. Total scores and satisfaction were higher in 3D groups, with students endorsing the educational value of both model types. Time to completion was shorter in 3D groups (3DV: 9.4 min ± 4.7; 3DP: 7.1 min ± 3.5) versus CT-only (11 min ± 5.3, p < 0.05). Total scores and satisfaction were higher in 3D groups, with students endorsing the educational value of both model types.
conclusion3D-printed and virtual kidney models improved students' spatial understanding and task performance in renal tumor complexity assessment, reflecting enhanced anatomical comprehension rather than pure CT interpretation skills. Virtual models, offering similar educational benefits at lower cost, may be especially valuable for integration into medical curricula.
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.