Efficacy and safety of 3D print-assisted surgery for the treatment of pilon fractures: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Table 1 Characteristics of included studies

Studies	Year	Study year	Groups	Sample size	Age ± mean (year)	Pilon fracture classification
Huang et al.	2015	2008–2013	3D	31	48.6	RA: I 9, II 12, III 10
Huang et al.	2015	2008–2013	C	30	48.6	RA: I 7, II 15, III 8
Tang et al.	2015	2012–2014	3D	32	38.4 ± 2.8	RA: II 12, III 20
Tang et al.	2015	2012–2014	C	32	37.2 ± 2.4	RA: II 15, III 17
Fan et al.	2016	2014–2015	3D	50	43.5 ± 3.5	RA: II 20, III 30
Fan et al.	2016	2014–2015	C	50	43.5 ± 3.5	RA: II 21, III 29
Li et al.	2016	2013–2014	3D	30	34.8 ± 6.0	AO:13 C2, 17 C3
Li et al.	2016	2013–2014	C	30	35.8 ± 6.2	AO:12 C2, 18 C3
Gu et al.	2017	2011–2015	3D	36	38.9 ± 5.9	RA: II 15, III 21
Gu et al.	2017	2011–2015	C	36	39.6 ± 5.5	RA: II 12, III 24
Ou et al.	2017	NR	3D	18	37.4 ± 3.7	RA: II 10, III 8
Ou et al.	2017	NR	C	18	38.4 ± 3.5	RA: II 9, III 9
Zheng et al.	2018	2013–2016	3D	45	41.2 ± 9.3	AO:5 C1, 14 C2, 26 C3
Zheng et al.	2018	2013–2016	C	48	42.5 ± 9.0	AO: 8 C1, 17 C2, 23 C3

3D 3D print-assisted surgery, C conventional surgery, RA Ruedi-Allgower, NR no report

ISSN: 1749-799X