Three-dimensional evaluations of preoperative planning reproducibility for the osteosynthesis of distal radius fractures

Yuichi Yoshii, Takeshi Ogawa, Atsuo Shigi, Kunihiro Oka, Tsuyoshi Murase, Tomoo Ishii, Yuichi Yoshii, Takeshi Ogawa, Atsuo Shigi, Kunihiro Oka, Tsuyoshi Murase, Tomoo Ishii

Abstract

Background: Three-dimensional preoperative planning was applied for the osteosynthesis of distal radius fractures. The objective of this study was to evaluate the reproducibility of three-dimensional preoperative planning for the osteosynthesis of distal radius fractures with three-dimensional reference points.

Methods: Sixty-three wrists of 63 distal radius fracture patients who underwent osteosynthesis with three-dimensional preoperative planning were evaluated. After taking preoperative CT scans of the injured wrists, 3D images of the distal radius were created. Fracture reduction, implants choices, and placements simulation were performed based on the 3D images. One month after the surgery, postoperative CT images were taken. The reproducibility was evaluated with preoperative plan and postoperative 3D images. The images were compared with the three-dimensional coordinates of radial styloid process, volar and dorsal edges of sigmoid notch, and the barycentric coordinates of the three reference points. The reproducibility of the preoperative plan was evaluated by the distance of the coordinates between the plan and postoperative images for the reference points. The reproducibility of radial inclination and volar tilt on three-dimensional images were evaluated by intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC).

Results: The distances between the preoperative plan and the postoperative reduction for each reference point were (1) 2.1±1.3 mm, (2) 1.9±1.2 mm, and (3) 1.9±1.2 mm, respectively. The distance between the preoperative plan and postoperative reduction for the barycentric coordinate was 1.3±0.8 mm. ICCs were 0.54 and 0.54 for the volar tilt and radial inclination, respectively (P<0.01).

Conclusions: Three-dimensional preoperative planning for the osteosynthesis of distal radius fracture was reproducible with an error of about 2 mm for each reference point and the correlations of reduction shapes were moderate. The analysis method and reference points may be helpful to understand the accuracy of reductions for the three-dimensional preoperative planning in the osteosynthesis of distal radius fractures.

Trial registration: Registered as NCT02909647 at ClinicalTrials.gov.

Keywords: Computed tomography; Computer-assisted orthopedic surgery; Distal radius fracture; Osteosynthesis; Preoperative plan; Three dimensions.

Conflict of interest statement

No benefits in any form have been received or will be received from a commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this article.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
An example of the preoperative planning process. a Reduction simulation in the axial view, b reduction simulation in the sagittal view, c implant choices and placement
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Axial view of 3D image. a Preoperative plan, b postoperative image. Three reference points, (1) radial styloid process, (2) sigmoid notch volar edge, and (3) sigmoid notch dorsal edge, were marked on the image. The barycentric coordinates of the plane connecting the three reference points were measured
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Sagittal and coronal views of a 3D image. a Sagittal view, b coronal view
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Results of coordinates for three reference points in the axial plane. a Results of coordinates for the preoperative plan image. b Results of coordinates for the postoperative reduction image. The orange dots indicate radial styloid process: reference point (1). The gray dots indicate sigmoid notch volar edge: reference point (2). The blue dots indicate sigmoid notch dorsal edge: reference point (3)
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Results of coordinates for three reference points in the sagittal plane. a Results of coordinates for the preoperative plan image. b Results of coordinates for the postoperative reduction image. The orange dots indicate radial styloid process: reference point (1). The gray dots indicate sigmoid notch volar edge: reference point (2). The blue dots indicate sigmoid notch dorsal edge: reference point (3)
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Results for the barycentric coordinates in the axial plane. a Results of coordinates for the preoperative plan image. b Results of coordinates for the postoperative reduction image
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Results of correlations for the volar tilt and radial inclination. a Results of volar tilt correlations between the preoperative plan and postoperative reduction. b Results of radial inclination correlations between the preoperative plan and postoperative reduction

References

    1. Zheng G, Nolte LP. Computer-assisted orthopedic surgery: current state and future perspective. Front Surg. 2015;2:66. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2015.00066.
    1. Kubicek J, Tomanec F, Cerny M, Vilimek D, Kalova M, Oczka D. Recent trends, technical concepts and components of computer-assisted orthopedic surgery systems: a comprehensive review. Sensors (Basel) 2019;19:E5199. doi: 10.3390/s19235199.
    1. Virk S, Qureshi S. Navigation in minimally invasive spine surgery. J Spine Surg. 2019;5(Suppl 1):S25–S30. doi: 10.21037/jss.2019.04.23.
    1. Bai L, Yang J, Chen X, Sun Y, Li X. Medical robotics in bone fracture reduction surgery: a review. Sensors (Basel) 2019;19:E3593. doi: 10.3390/s19163593.
    1. Hernandez D, Garimella R, Eltorai AEM, Daniels AH. Computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery. Orthop Surg. 2017;9:152–158. doi: 10.1111/os.12323.
    1. Montavon PM, Voss K, Langley-Hobbs SJ. Feline orthopedic surgery and musculoskeletal disease book 35.3.3 Plating, 29.2.4 Plating. 2009.
    1. Costa ADS., Jr Assessment of operative times of multiple surgical specialties in a public university hospital. Einstein (Sao Paulo) 2017;15:200–205. doi: 10.1590/S1679-45082017GS3902.
    1. Alluri RK, Hill JR, Ghiassi A. Distal radius fractures: approaches, indications, and techniques. J Hand Surg [Am] 2016;41:845–854. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2016.05.015.
    1. Ziran N, Soles GLS, Matta JM. Outcomes after surgical treatment of acetabular fractures: a review. Patient Saf Surg. 2019;13:16. doi: 10.1186/s13037-019-0196-2.
    1. Giordano V, Giordano M, Glória RC, de Souza FS, di Tullio P, Lages MM, Koch HA. General principles for treatment of femoral head fractures. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2019;10:155–160. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2017.07.013.
    1. Ali M, Brogren E, Wagner P, Atroshi I. Association between distal radial fracture malunion and patient-reported activity limitations: a long-term follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2018;100:633–639. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.17.00107.
    1. Smeraglia F, Buono AD, Maffulli N. Wrist arthroscopy in the management of articular distal radius fractures. Br Med Bull. 2016;119:157–165. doi: 10.1093/bmb/ldw032.
    1. Seigerman D, Lutsky K, Fletcher D, Katt B, Kwok M, Mazur D, Sodha S, Beredjiklian PK. Complications in the management of distal radius fractures: how do we avoid them? Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2019;12:204–212. doi: 10.1007/s12178-019-09544-8.
    1. Yoshii Y, Kusakabe T, Akita K, Tung WL, Ishii T. Reproducibility of three-dimensional digital preoperative planning for the osteosynthesis of distal radius fractures. J Orthop Res. 2017;35:2646–2651. doi: 10.1002/jor.23578.
    1. Wu G, van der Helm FC, Veeger HE, Makhsous M, Van Roy P, Anglin C, Nagels J, Karduna AR, McQuade K, Wang X, Werner FW, Buchholz B, International Society of Biomechanics ISB recommendation on definitions of joint coordinate systems of various joints for the reporting of human joint motion--Part II: shoulder, elbow, wrist and hand. J Biomech. 2005;38:981–992. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.05.042.
    1. Oura K, Oka K, Kawanishi Y, Sugamoto K, Yoshikawa H, Murase T. Volar morphology of the distal radius in axial planes: a quantitative analysis. J Orthop Res. 2015;33:496–503. doi: 10.1002/jor.22780.
    1. Liu ZJ, Jia J, Zhang YG, Tian W, Jin X, Hu YC. Internal fixation of complicated acetabular fractures directed by preoperative surgery with 3D printing models. Orthop Surg. 2017;9:257–260. doi: 10.1111/os.12324.
    1. Chen C, Cai L, Zheng W, Wang J, Guo X, Chen H. The efficacy of using 3D printing models in the treatment of fractures: a randomised clinical trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2019;20:65. doi: 10.1186/s12891-019-2448-2449.
    1. Arora S, Grover SB, Batra S, Sharma VK. Comparative evaluation of postreduction intra-articular distal radial fractures by radiographs and multidetector computed tomography. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010;92:2523–2532. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.I.01617.
    1. Katz MA, Beredjiklian PK, Bozentka DJ, Steinberg DR. Computed tomography scanning of intra-articular distal radius fractures: does it influence treatment? J Hand Surg [Am] 2001;26:415–421. doi: 10.1053/jhsu.2001.22930a.
    1. Omori S, Murase T, Kataoka T, Kawanishi Y, Oura K, Miyake J, Tanaka H, Yoshikawa H. Three-dimensional corrective osteotomy using a patient-specific osteotomy guide and bone plate based on a computer simulation system: accuracy analysis in a cadaver study. Int J Med Robot. 2014;10:196–202. doi: 10.1002/rcs.1530.
    1. Roner S, Vlachopoulos L, Nagy L, Schweizer A, Fürnstahl P. Accuracy and early clinical outcome of 3-dimensional planned and guided single-cut osteotomies of malunited forearm bones. J Hand Surg [Am] 2017;42:1031.e1–1031.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2017.07.002.
    1. Stockmans F, Dezillie M, Vanhaecke J. Accuracy of 3D virtual planning of corrective osteotomies of the distal radius. J Wrist Surg. 2013;2:306–314. doi: 10.1055/s-0033-1359307.
    1. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons . The treatment of distal radius fractures guideline and evidence report. 2009.
    1. Oka K, Murase T, Moritomo H, Goto A, Sugamoto K, Yoshikawa H. Accuracy analysis of three-dimensional bone surface models of the forearm constructed from multidetector computed tomography data. Int J Med Robot. 2009;5:452–457. doi: 10.1002/rcs.277.

Source: PubMed

3
Subscribe