MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409710398 · doi:10.3389/fvets.2025.1582720

Orthopedic applications of 3D printing in canine veterinary medicine

2025· article· en· W4409710398 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Claire E. Thomas, Pierre Amsellem, David Nascene, Yu-Hui Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Veterinary Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Orthopedics and Neurology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrthopedic surgeryVeterinary medicineMedicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: This case series investigates the application of 3D printing in veterinary orthopedic surgeries, emphasizing its potential to enhance preoperative planning, intraoperative precision, and postoperative outcomes. Animals: Three canines-German Shepherd, Basset Hound, and Labrador Retriever-were included in this study. Materials and methods: Three canine cases involving complex orthopedic deformities were selected to illustrate different uses of 3D printing in veterinary surgery. CT scans were segmented using Materialise Mimics 26.0, followed by virtual surgical planning and creation of 3D printed models and guides. Results: In Case 1, a 2-year-old German Shepherd with a congenital right tibial deformity underwent successful surgical correction aided by a preoperatively prepared external fixator frame, saving approximately 1 h of OR time. In Case 2, a 1-year-old Basset Hound with a left antebrachial deformity had a double wedge osteotomy performed with the assistance of patient-specific cutting and reconstruction guides, leading to optimal alignment and reduced surgical time. Case 3 involved a young, less than 1-year-old Labrador Retriever rescue with severe bilateral tibiofemoral deformity, where 3D printed models helped the surgeon determine that surgery was not the best option, potentially preventing a poor outcome. Clinical relevance: This case series highlights the transformative potential of 3D printing in veterinary orthopedic surgery, illustrating its ability to improve aid surgical outcomes, reduce operative times, and be a valuable tool in preoperative decision-making. This technology allows for tailored surgical interventions, enhancing the precision and effectiveness of treatment plans in veterinary medicine.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.306 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Veterinary ScienceSame topicVeterinary Orthopedics and NeurologyFrench-language works237,207