ReviewAdvances and technical standards in neurosurgery2026
3D-Printing in Neurosurgical Training: Hands-On Practice, Patient-Specific Planning and Simulation.
Review in Advances and technical standards in neurosurgery, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Training in neurosurgery is increasingly challenged by the complexity of cranial anatomy, the rarity of certain pathologies, ethical constraints on cadaveric dissection, and limited operative exposure. Advances in three-dimensional (3D) printing have enabled the development of patient-specific anatomical models derived from computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging, offering realistic, reproducible platforms for surgical training and preoperative planning. This chapter reviews contemporary applications of 3D-printed, hybrid, and multimodal simulation models in neurosurgical education, with particular emphasis on complex craniofacial and encephalocele procedures. Through illustrative case reports-including frontoethmoidal and transsphenoidal meningoencephaloceles, metopic craniosynostosis, and late encephalocele correction-the chapter demonstrates how multimaterial 3D-printing, hybrid silicone-resin constructs, and integration with augmented and mixed reality can enhance spatial understanding, tactile feedback, and procedural rehearsal. Evidence from these cases indicates that patient-specific simulation can alter surgical strategy, reduce operative time and blood loss, and improve multidisciplinary communication. Educational benefits extend beyond surgeons to trainees and allied health professionals, supporting structured skill acquisition and competency-based assessment. The chapter also discusses the relevance of low-cost 3D-printing solutions for low- and middle-income countries, highlighting open-source software and affordable fabrication techniques as tools to reduce global disparities in neurosurgical care. Limitations related to cost, material fidelity, imaging quality, and technical expertise are addressed, alongside future directions for research and curriculum integration. Overall, 3D-printed and hybrid simulation models represent a transformative approach to neurosurgical training and patient-specific surgical planning, with significant implications for education, safety, and global health equity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42393455What 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.