4 research outputs found

    Are 3D-printed Models of Tibial Plateau Fractures a Useful Addition to Understanding Fractures for Junior Surgeons?

    Get PDF
    Background Tibial plateau fractures are often complex, and they can be challenging to treat. Classifying fractures is often part of the treatment process, but intra- and interobserver reliability of fracture classification systems often is inadequate to the task, and classifications that lack reliability can mislead providers and result in harm to patients. Three-dimensionally (3D)-printed models might help in this regard, but whether that is the case for the classification of tibial plateau fractures, and whether the utility of such models might vary by the experience of the individual classifying the fractures, is unknown. Questions/purposes (1) Does the overall interobserver agreement improve when fractures are classified with 3D-printed models compared with conventional radiology? (2) Does interobserver agreement vary among attending and consultant trauma surgeons, senior surgical residents, and junior surgical residents? (3) Do surgeons' and surgical residents' confidence and accuracy improve when tibial plateau fractures are classified with an additional 3D model compared with conventional radiology? Methods Between 2012 and 2020, 113 patients with tibial plateau fractures were treated at a Level 1 trauma center. Forty-four patients were excluded based on the presence of bone diseases (such as osteoporosis) and the absence of a CT scan. To increase the chance to detect an improvement or deterioration and to prevent observers from losing focus during the classification, we decided to include 40 patients with tibial plateau fractures. Nine trauma surgeons, eight senior surgical residents, and eight junior surgical residents-none of whom underwent any study-specific pretraining-classified these fractures according to three often-used classification systems (Schatzker, OA/OTA, and the Luo three-column concept), with and without 3D-printed models, and they indicated their overall confidence on a 10-point Likert scale, with 0 meaning not confident at all and 10 absolutely certainty. To set the gold standard, a panel of three experienced trauma surgeons who had special expertise in knee surgery and 10 years to 25 years of experience in practice also classified the fractures until consensus was reached. The Fleiss kappa was used to determine interobserver agreement for fracture classification. Differences in confidence in assessing fractures with and without the 3D-printed model were compared using a paired t-test. Accuracy was calculated by comparing the participants' observations with the gold standard. Results The overall interobserver agreement improved minimally for fracture classification according to two of three classification systems (Schatzker: kappa(conv) = 0.514 versus kappa(3Dprint) = 0.539; p = 0.005; AO/OTA:kappa(conv) = 0.359 versus kappa(3Dprint) = 0.372; p = 0.03). However, none of the classification systems, even when used by our most experienced group of trauma surgeons, achieved more than moderate interobserver agreement, meaning that a large proportion of fractures were misclassified by at least one observer. Overall, there was no improvement in self-assessed confidence in classifying fractures or accuracy with 3D-printed models; confidence was high (about 7 points on a 10-point scale) as rated by all observers, despite moderate or worse accuracy and interobserver agreement Conclusion Although 3D-printed models minimally improved the overall interobserver agreement for two of three classification systems, none of the classification systems achieved more than moderate interobserver agreement. This suggests that even with 3D-printed models, many fractures would be misclassified, which could result in misleading communication, inaccurate prognostic assessments, unclear research, and incorrect treatment choices. Therefore, we cannot recommend the use of 3D-printed models in practice and research for classification of tibial plateau fractures

    Quantifying the Differences between 3D Virtual Planning and Attained Postoperative Reduction on CT for Patients with Tibial Plateau Fractures; a Clinical Feasibility Study

    Get PDF
    Background: Three-Dimensional Virtual Planning (3DVP) has been proven to be effective for limiting intra-articular screw penetration and improving the quality of reduction for numerous fractures. However, the value of 3DVP for patients with tibial plateau fractures has yet to be determined. Purposes: The research question of this study is: Can Computed Tomography Micromotion Analysis (CTMA) provide a reliable quantification of the difference between 3DVP and the postoperative reduction on CT for tibial plateau fractures? Methods: Nine consecutive adult patients who received surgical treatment for a tibial plateau fracture and received pre- and postoperative CT scans were included from a level I trauma center in the Netherlands. The preoperative CT scans of the patients were uploaded in a 3DVP software. In this software, fracture fragments were reduced and the reduction was saved as a 3D file (STL). The quality of the reduction from the 3DVP software was compared with the postoperative results using CT Micromotion Analysis (CTMA). In this analysis, the translation of the largest intra-articular fragment was calculated by aligning the postoperative CT with the 3DVP. Coordinates and measurement points were defined in the X, Y, and Z axes. The combined values of X and Y were used to define the intra-articular gap. The Z-axis was defined as the line from cranial to caudal and was used to define intra-articular step-off. Results: The intra-articular step-off was 2.4 mm (Range 0.5–4.6). Moreover, the mean translation of the X-axis and Y-axis, which was defined as the intra-articular gap, was 4.2 mm (Range 0.6–10.7). Conclusions: 3DVP provides excellent insight into the fracture and its fragments. Utilizing the largest intra-articular fragment, it is feasible to quantify the difference between 3DVP and a postoperative CT using CTMA. A prospective study to further analyze the use of 3DVP in terms of intra-articular reduction and surgical and patient-related outcomes has been started by our team.</p

    The symmetry of the left and right tibial plateau: a comparison of 200 tibial plateaus.

    Get PDF
    PURPOSE: This study aims to investigate the symmetry of the left and right tibial plateau in young healthy individuals to determine whether left-right mirroring can be reliably used to optimize preoperative 3D virtual planning for patients with tibial plateau fractures. METHODS: One hundred healthy subjects, without previous knee surgery, severe knee trauma, or signs of osteoarthritis were included for a previous dynamic imaging study of the knee. The subjects underwent a CT scan, scanning the left and right knee with a slice thickness of 0.8 mm. 3D surface models of the femur, patella, and tibia were created using a convolutional neural network. The 3D models of the left and right tibias were exported to MATLAB © and the tibias were mirrored. The mirrored tibias were superimposed on the contralateral tibia using a coherent point drift surface matching algorithm. Correspondence points on both surfaces were established, the mean root squared distance was calculated and visualized in a boxplot and heatmaps. RESULTS: The overall mean difference between correspondence points on the left and right tibial plateau is 0.6276 ± 0.0343 mm. The greatest differences between correspondence points were seen around two specific surfaces on the outside of the tibial plateau; where the distal tibia was cut 15 mm below the tibial plateau and around the tibiofibular joint. CONCLUSIONS: The differences between the left and right tibial plateau are small and therefore, we can be confident that the mirrored contralateral, unfractured, tibial plateau can be used as a template for 3D virtual preoperative planning for young patients without previous damage to the knee

    Quantifying the Differences between 3D Virtual Planning and Attained Postoperative Reduction on CT for Patients with Tibial Plateau Fractures; a Clinical Feasibility Study.

    No full text
    Background: Three-Dimensional Virtual Planning (3DVP) has been proven to be effective for limiting intra-articular screw penetration and improving the quality of reduction for numerous fractures. However, the value of 3DVP for patients with tibial plateau fractures has yet to be determined. Purposes: The research question of this study is: Can Computed Tomography Micromotion Analysis (CTMA) provide a reliable quantification of the difference between 3DVP and the postoperative reduction on CT for tibial plateau fractures? Methods: Nine consecutive adult patients who received surgical treatment for a tibial plateau fracture and received pre- and postoperative CT scans were included from a level I trauma center in the Netherlands. The preoperative CT scans of the patients were uploaded in a 3DVP software. In this software, fracture fragments were reduced and the reduction was saved as a 3D file (STL). The quality of the reduction from the 3DVP software was compared with the postoperative results using CT Micromotion Analysis (CTMA). In this analysis, the translation of the largest intra-articular fragment was calculated by aligning the postoperative CT with the 3DVP. Coordinates and measurement points were defined in the X, Y, and Z axes. The combined values of X and Y were used to define the intra-articular gap. The Z-axis was defined as the line from cranial to caudal and was used to define intra-articular step-off. Results: The intra-articular step-off was 2.4 mm (Range 0.5-4.6). Moreover, the mean translation of the X-axis and Y-axis, which was defined as the intra-articular gap, was 4.2 mm (Range 0.6-10.7). Conclusions: 3DVP provides excellent insight into the fracture and its fragments. Utilizing the largest intra-articular fragment, it is feasible to quantify the difference between 3DVP and a postoperative CT using CTMA. A prospective study to further analyze the use of 3DVP in terms of intra-articular reduction and surgical and patient-related outcomes has been started by our team
    corecore