ReviewCureus2026
Three-Dimensional Soft Tissue Reconstructive Planning in Orthoplastic Oncology: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Complex orthopedic oncology cases require coordinated planning between tumor surgeons and reconstructive plastic surgeons, yet a technological disconnect exists. While orthopedic oncologists seek to achieve millimeter-level precision using three-dimensional-guided systems for bone tumor resection from computed tomography scan reformats, plastic surgeons rely on traditional two-dimensional imaging for reconstructive planning in the same cases. We conducted a systematic review of reviews examining three-dimensional technologies in orthopedic oncology and their relevance to soft tissue reconstructive planning. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases through November 2024, using terms combining "three-dimensional", "orthopedic oncology", and "bone tumor". Two independent reviewers performed dual screening with disagreements resolved by consensus. After reviewing 325 articles, we identified 16 reviews (three systematic, 13 narrative) published between 2009 and 2024. Despite comprehensive evaluation across these reviews encompassing hundreds of primary studies, no applications for soft tissue reconstruction planning were identified. Orthopedic teams demonstrated remarkable progress in precision with patient-specific instrumentation achieving superior negative margin rates (89% versus 68% for conventional methods) and cutting deviations of 0.3-4 mm, yet the same imaging data used for skeletal planning, containing nearly all information necessary for soft tissue reconstruction, remained unutilized for reconstructive purposes. Three-dimensional planning technologies have transformed orthopedic oncology but are typically absent from soft tissue reconstruction planning in the same cases. A significant opportunity exists for plastic surgeons to integrate into existing three-dimensional workflows through defect volume analysis, vessel mapping, flap design optimization, and coordinated reconstructive timing within navigation-guided resections.
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.