Advances in bone tissue engineering and three-dimensional printing: Current strategies and future perspectives in orthopaedics

Table 1 Summary of representative clinical applications of three-dimensional-printed implants

Ref.	Material	Clinical indication	n	Key outcomes	Follow-up times
Wang et al[40]	Ti	Lumbar fusion	91	Greater restoration of intervertebral height and higher fusion rate vs polyetheretherketone; no increase in complications	> 6 months
Donaldson et al[41]	Ti	Lumbar fusion	50	Subsidence 303%; reoperation 1 case; no infection or device failure	11.3 months (range 7-24)
Broekhuis et al[42]	Ti	Pelvic reconstruction	15	Stable fixation, satisfactory limb function; implant survival 733%	33.8 months (IQR: 24.0-78.1)
Boyle et al[43]	Ti	Pelvic reconstruction	106	Implant retention 96% (95%CI: 90-99); infection-free survival 85%-86%; intra-op complications 4.1%	4.1 years (range 6-10)
Yoon et al[44]	Ti	Cranioplasty	40	Excellent volumetric symmetry (DSC = 0.75); 75% “very satisfactory” cosmetic outcome; no reoperation	6 months
Ebel et al[45]	Poly(methyl methacrylate)	Cranioplasty	31	Cosmetic results comparable to industrial implants; minor wound irritation; reduced cost	33.3 months (range 127-53.9)
Toh et al[11]	PCL	Chronic subdural hematoma	126	High satisfaction; no increase in recurrence or infection	24 months (IQR: 15-37)
Li et al[46]	Ti	Mandibular reconstruction	5	Stable occlusion, excellent facial symmetry (< 4.5 mm deviation); no flap necrosis	15.8 months (range 12-19)

IQR: Interquartile range; CI: Confidence interval; DSC: Differential scanning calorimetry; PCL: Polycaprolactone.