3.8 Review

Use of three-dimensional printing in preoperative planning in orthopaedic trauma surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal

WORLD JOURNAL OF ORTHOPEDICS
Volume 11, Issue 1, Pages 57-67

Publisher

BAISHIDENG PUBLISHING GROUP INC
DOI: 10.5312/wjo.v11.i1.57

Keywords

Orthopaedic surgery; Trauma; Three-dimensional printing

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND With the increasing complexity of surgical interventions performed in orthopaedic trauma surgery and the improving technologies used in three-dimensional (3D) printing, there has been an increased interest in the concept. It has been shown that 3D models allow surgeons to better visualise anatomy, aid in planning and performing complex surgery. It is however not clear how best to utilise the technique and whether this results in better outcomes. AIM To evaluate the effect of 3D printing used in pre-operative planning in orthopaedic trauma surgery on clinical outcomes. METHODS We performed a comprehensive systematic review of the literature and a meta-analysis. Medline, Ovid and Embase were searched from inception to February 8, 2018. Randomised controlled trials, case-control studies, cohort studies and case series of five patients or more were included across any area of orthopaedic trauma. The primary outcomes were operation time, intra-operative blood loss and fluoroscopy used. RESULTS Seventeen studies (922 patients) met our inclusion criteria and were reviewed. The use of 3D printing across all specialties in orthopaedic trauma surgery demonstrated an overall reduction in operation time of 19.85% [95% confidence intervals (CI): (-22.99, -16.71)], intra-operative blood loss of 25.73% [95%CI: (-31.07, -20.40)], and number of times fluoroscopy was used by 23.80% [95%CI: (-38.49, -9.10)]. CONCLUSION Our results suggest that the use of 3D printing in pre-operative planning in orthopaedic trauma reduces operative time, intraoperative blood loss and the number of times fluoroscopy is used.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available