Background. Radiological and clinical results of total shoulder arthroplasty are dependent upon ability to accurately measure and correct glenoid version. There are a variety of imaging modalities and computer-assisted reconstruction programmes that are employed with varying degrees of success. We have compared three freely available modalities: unformatted
An adult acquired flatfoot deformity (AAFD) is a complex 3D deformity. Surgical correction consists of a medial calcaneal osteotomy (MCO) but shows limitations due to the current 2D assessment. Therefore, the aim is to determine the influence of an MCO on the longitudinal foot arch assessed by 2D and 3D weightbearing CT (WBCT). Seventeen patients with a mean age of 44,5 years (range 18–66 yrs) were retrospectively included. MCO was indicated in a stage II AAFD (N=15) and a post-traumatic valgus deformity (N=2). Pre- and post-operative imaging was obtained from a WBCT. The height of the longitudinal foot arch was measured as the distance from the navicular tuberositas to the floor (Navicular Height, NH) on
Introduction. The degree of glenoid bone loss associated with primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis can influence the type of glenoid implant selected and its placement in total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). The literature has demonstrated inaccurate glenoid component placement when using standard instruments and two-dimensional (2D) imaging without templating, particularly as the degree of glenoid deformity or bone loss worsens. Published results have demonstrated improved accuracy of implant placement when using three-dimensional (3D) computed tomography (CT) imaging with implant templating and patient specific instrumentation (PSI). Accurate placement of the glenoid component in TSA is expected to decrease component malposition and better correct pathologic deformity in order to decrease the risk of component loosening and failure over time. Different types of PSI have been described. Some PSI use 3D printed single use disposable instrumentation, while others use adjustable and reusable-patient specific instrumentation (R-PSI). However, no studies have directly compared the accuracy of different types of PSI in shoulder arthroplasty. We combined our clinical experience and compare the accuracy of glenoid implant placement with five different types of instrumentation when using 3D CT imaging, preoperative planning and implant templating in a series of 173 patients undergoing primary TSA. Our hypothesis was that all PSI technologies would demonstrate equivalent accuracy of implant placement and that PSI would show the most benefit with more severe glenoid deformity. Discussion and Conclusions. We demonstrated no consistent differences in accuracy of 3D CT preoperative planning and templating with any type of PSI used. In Groups 1 and 2, standard instrumentation was used in a patient specific manner defined by the software and in Groups 3, 4, and 5 a patient specific instrument was used. In all groups, the two surgeons were very experienced with use of the 3D CT preoperative planning and templating software and all of the instrumentation prior to starting this study, as well as very experienced with shoulder arthroplasty. This is a strength of the study when defining the efficacy of the technology, but limits the generalizability of the findings when considering the effectiveness of the technology with surgeons that may not have as much experience with shoulder arthroplasty and/or the PSI technology. Conversely, it could be postulated that greater improvements in accuracy may be seen with the studied PSI technology, when compared to no 3D planning or PSI, with less experienced surgeons. There could also be differences between the PSI technologies when used by less experienced surgeons, either across all cases or based upon the severity of pathology. When the surgeon is part of the method, the effectiveness of the technology is equally dependent upon the surgeon using the technology. A broader study using different surgeons is required to test the effectiveness of this technology. Comparing the results of this study with published results in the literature, 3D CT imaging and implant templating with use of PSI results in more accurate placement of the glenoid implant when compared to
Assessing glenoid version is important for a successful total shoulder arthroplasty. Glenoid version is defined as the orientation of the glenoid cavity in relation to a plane perpendicular to the scapula body. Glenoid revision averages between 1 to 2 degrees of retroversion and varies between race and sex. In general glenoid retroversion is overestimated by 6.5 degrees on plain radiographs. Furthermore standard axial
Background. Humeral version is the twist angle of the humeral head relative to the distal humerus. Pre-operatively, it is most commonly measured referencing the transepicondylar axis, although various techniques are described in literature (Matsumura et al. 2014, Edelson 1999, Boileau et al., 2008). Accurate estimation of the version angle is important for humeral head osteotomy in preparation for shoulder arthroplasty, as deviations from native version can result in prosthesis malalignment. Most humeral head osteotomy guides instruct the surgeon to reference the ulnar axis with the elbow flexed at 90°. Average version values have been reported at 17.6° relative to the transepicondylar axis and 28.8° relative to the ulnar axis (Hernigou, Duparc, and Hernigou 2014), although it is highly variable and has been reported to range from 10° to 55° (Pearl and Volk 1999). These studies used
Background. Dislocation is a common complication after proximal and total femur prosthesis reconstruction for primary bone sarcoma patients. Expandable prosthesis in children puts an additional challenge due to the lengthening process. Hip stability is impaired due to multiple factors: Resection of the hip stabilizers as part of the sarcoma resection: forces acts on the hip during the lengthening; and mismatch of native growing acetabulum to the metal femoral head. Surgical solutions described in literature are various with reported low rates of success. Objective. Assess a novel 3D surgical planning technology by use of 3D models (computerized and physical), 3D planning, and Patient Specific Instruments (PSI) in supporting correction of young children suffering from hip instability after expandable prosthesis reconstruction following proximal femur resection. This innovative technology creates a new dimension of visualization and customization, and could improve understanding of this complex problem and facilitate the surgical decision making and procedure. Method. Two children, both patients with Ewing Sarcoma of the left proximal femur stage-IIB, ages 3/5 years at diagnosis, were treated with conventional chemotherapy followed by proximal femur resection. Both were reconstructed with expandable prosthesis (one at resection and other 4 years after resection). Hip migration developed gradually during lengthening process in the 24m follow up period. 3D software (Mimics, Materialise, Belgium) were used to make computerized 3D models of patients' pelvises. These were used to 3D print 1:1 physical models. Custom 3D planning software (MSk Lab, Imperial College London) allowed surgeons visualizing the anatomical status and assess of problem severity. Thereafter, osteotomies planes and the desired position of acetabular roof after reduction of hip joint were planned by the surgeons. These plans were used to generate 3D printed PSIs to guide the osteotomies during shelf and triple osteotomy surgeries. Accuracy of planning and PSIs were verified with fluoroscopy and post-op X-rays, by comparing cutting planes and post-op position of the acetabulum. Results. Surgeons reported excellent experience with the 3D models (computerized and physical). It helped them in the decision process with an improved understanding of the relationship between prosthesis head and acetabulum, a clear view of the osteophytes and bone formation surrounding the pseudoacetabulum, and osteophytes inside the native acetabulum. These osteophytes were not immediately visible on
Objective. The aim of the study was to evaluate inter observer reliability and intra observer reproducibility between the three column classification using 3D CT reconstruction models and schatzker classification systems using
Iliopsoas impingement occurs in 4% to 30% of patients after undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). Despite a relatively high incidence, there are few attempts at modelling impingement between the iliopsoas and acetabular component, and no attempts at modelling this in a representative cohort of subjects. The purpose of this study was to develop a novel computational model for quantifying the impingement between the iliopsoas and acetabular component and validate its utility in a case-controlled investigation. This was a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent THA surgery that included 23 symptomatic patients diagnosed with iliopsoas tendonitis, and 23 patients not diagnosed with iliopsoas tendonitis. All patients received postoperative CT imaging, postoperative standing radiography, and had minimum six months’ follow-up. 3D models of each patient’s prosthetic and bony anatomy were generated, landmarked, and simulated in a novel iliopsoas impingement detection model in supine and standing pelvic positions. Logistic regression models were implemented to determine if the probability of pain could be significantly predicted. Receiver operating characteristic curves were generated to determine the model’s sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC).Aims
Methods
Recurrent dislocation is both a cause and consequence of glenoid bone loss, and the extent of the bony defect is an indicator guiding operative intervention. Literature suggests that loss greater than 25% requires glenoid reconstruction. Measuring bone loss is controversial; studies use different methods to determine this, with no clear evidence of reproducibility. A systematic review was performed to identify existing CT-based methods of quantifying glenoid bone loss and establish their reliability and reproducibility A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses-compliant systematic review of conventional and grey literature was performed.Aims
Methods
Detailed preoperative planning is essential for open reduction and internal fixation of acetabular fractures if a successful outcome is to be achieved. Decisions such as patient positioning, approach, reduction techniques and implant positioning are greatly influenced by fracture pattern and displacement. These fractures are frequently complex and a thorough understanding of their 3-Dimensional (3D) form is necessary for pre-operative decision making. A combination of biplanar x-rays, 2 Dimensional CT scans (Axial, Sagittal and Coronal multi-plane reformats) and, more recently, 3D CT reconstructions are provided routinely. However, the 3D reconstructions are provided to surgeons as static 2D pictures of the 3D model (up to 6 different views), rather than a true 3D representation. In this study we used dynamic 3D models to provide additional information to surgeons. The 3D models were generated on a standard desktop or laptop computer and can be used in the operating theatre (Osirix Dicom viewing software). These true 3D reconstructions allow the surgeon to manipulate the model himself in real time so that the fracture can be viewed at any angle and overlying fragments removed to expose deeper structures. 3 experienced consultant pelvic trauma surgeons reviewed plain radiographs and