ArticlePloS one2026
Exploring discrepancies between in vivo and simulated correction in 3D-planned distal radius osteotomies: the influence of biological factors.
Article in PloS one, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Three-dimensional virtual surgical planning (3D VSP) with patient-specific surgical guides (PSSGs) can improve the accuracy of corrective distal radius osteotomy. Simulation on 3D-printed bone models allows controlled evaluation of planned corrections, but such models do not reproduce biological factors, including bone quality and soft-tissue tension. The extent to which simulated corrections reflect in vivo surgical results remains unclear. This exploratory study included 13 patients who underwent corrective distal radius osteotomy using 3D VSP and PSSGs. Simulated osteotomies were performed on patient-specific 3D-printed bone models. Residual correction errors in volar tilt (VT), radial inclination (RI), and radial length (RL) were calculated relative to the 3D VSP for both in vivo and simulated corrections. Discrepancies between in vivo and simulated corrections were assessed, and their associations with age, bone mineral density estimated from Hounsfield units, and planned maximum distraction were explored using Spearman's rank correlation. Residual correction errors in simulated osteotomies were generally comparable to those observed in vivo. The largest differences between simulated and in vivo corrections were observed for VT (3.2), although the mean difference remained within clinically acceptable limits. A positive correlation was found between RL discrepancy and planned maximum distraction (rₛ = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.27-0.91, p = 0.01), and a negative correlation was found between RL discrepancy and bone mineral density (rₛ = -0.64, 95% CI: -0.88 - -0.13, p = 0.02). No correlations were identified for VT or RI. Simulated distal radius osteotomies on 3D-printed bone models produced correction errors broadly comparable to those achieved in vivo. However, small but systematic discrepancies in VT and RL suggest that biological factors may influence the relation between simulated and clinical outcomes. These findings support the use of simulation models for comparative studies while highlighting the need for cautious interpretation of simulation-based results.
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.