Intraoperative assessment of reduction and implant placement in acetabular fractures-limitations of 3D-imaging compared to computed tomography

被引:21
作者
Keil, Holger [1 ]
Beisemann, Nils [1 ]
Schnetzke, Marc [1 ]
Vetter, Sven Yves [1 ]
Swartman, Benedict [1 ]
Grutzner, Paul Alfred [1 ]
Franke, Jochen [1 ]
机构
[1] Heidelberg Univ, BG Trauma Ctr Ludwigshafen, MINTOS, Clin Trauma & Orthopaed Surg, Ludwig Guttmann Str 13, D-67071 Ludwigshafen, Germany
关键词
Intraoperative 3D imaging; Acetabular fracture; Computed tomography; Trauma; TOTAL HIP-ARTHROPLASTY; BODY-MASS INDEX; 3D C-ARM; IMAGE QUALITY; ITERATIVE RECONSTRUCTION; RETROSPECTIVE ANALYSIS; INTERNAL-FIXATION; METAL ARTIFACT; SURGERY; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1186/s13018-018-0780-7
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: In acetabular fractures, the assessment of reduction and implant placement has limitations in conventional 2D intraoperative imaging. 3D imaging offers the opportunity to acquire CT-like images and thus to improve the results. However, clinical experience shows that even 3D imaging has limitations, especially regarding artifacts when implants are placed. The purpose of this study was to assess the difference between intraoperative 3D imaging and postoperative CT regarding reduction and implant placement. Methods: Twenty consecutive cases of acetabular fractures were selected with a complete set of intraoperative 3D imaging and postoperative CT data. The largest detectable step and the largest detectable gap were measured in all three standard planes. These values were compared between the 3D data sets and CT data sets. Additionally, possible correlations between the possible confounders age and BMI and the difference between 3D and CT values were tested. Results: The mean difference of largest visible step between the 3D imaging and CT scan was 2.0 +/- 1.8 mm (0.0-5.8, p = 0.02) in the axial, 1.3 +/- 1.4 mm (0.0-3.7, p = 0.15) in the sagittal and 1.9 +/- 2.4 mm (0.0-7.4, p = 0.22) in the coronal views. The mean difference of largest visible gap between the 3D imaging and CT scan was 3.1 +/- 3.6 mm (0.0-14.1, p = 0.03) in the axial, 4.6 +/- 2.7 mm (1.2-8.7, p = 0.001) in the sagittal and 3.5 +/- 4.0 mm (0.0-15.4, p = 0.06) in the coronal views. A positive correlation between the age and the difference in gap measurements in the sagittal view was shown (rho = 0.556, p = 0.011). Conclusions: Intraoperative 3D imaging is a valuable adjunct in assessing reduction and implant placement in acetabular fractures but has limitations due to artifacts caused by implant material. This can lead to missed malreduction and impairment of clinical outcome, so postoperative CT should be considered in these cases.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 25 条
[1]   Reliability and consequences of intraoperative 3D imaging to control positions of thoracic pedicle screws [J].
Beck, Markus ;
Rotter, Robert ;
Gradl, Georg ;
Herlyn, Philipp ;
Kroeber, Markus ;
Mittlmeier, Thomas ;
Gierer, Philip .
ARCHIVES OF ORTHOPAEDIC AND TRAUMA SURGERY, 2012, 132 (10) :1371-1377
[2]   Accuracy and consequences of 3D-fluoroscopy in upper and lower extremity fracture treatment: A systematic review [J].
Beerekamp, M. S. H. ;
Sulkers, George S. I. ;
Ubbink, Dirk T. ;
Maas, Mario ;
Schep, Niels W. L. ;
Goslings, J. Carel .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2012, 81 (12) :4019-4028
[3]   Does intraoperative fluoroscopic 3D imaging provide extra information for fracture surgery? [J].
Carelsen, B. ;
Haverlag, R. ;
Ubbink, D. Th. ;
Luitse, J. S. K. ;
Goslings, J. C. .
ARCHIVES OF ORTHOPAEDIC AND TRAUMA SURGERY, 2008, 128 (12) :1419-1424
[4]   Impact of iterative reconstruction on image quality and radiation dose in multidetector CT of large body size adults [J].
Desai, Gaurav S. ;
Uppot, Raul N. ;
Yu, Elaine W. ;
Kambadakone, Avinash R. ;
Sahani, Dushyant V. .
EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2012, 22 (08) :1631-1640
[5]   Acetabular fracture: Long-term follow-up and factors associated with secondary implantation of total hip arthroplasty [J].
Dunet, B. ;
Tournier, C. ;
Billaud, A. ;
Lavoinne, N. ;
Fabre, T. ;
Durandeau, A. .
ORTHOPAEDICS & TRAUMATOLOGY-SURGERY & RESEARCH, 2013, 99 (03) :281-290
[6]   Open reduction and internal fixation aided by intraoperative 3-dimensional imaging improved the articular reduction in 72 displaced acetabular fractures [J].
Eckardt, Henrik ;
Lind, Dennis ;
Toendevold, Erik .
ACTA ORTHOPAEDICA, 2015, 86 (06) :684-689
[7]  
Franke J, J BONE JT SURG AM, V2012, P1386
[8]   An evaluation of three commercially available metal artifact reduction methods for CT imaging [J].
Huang, Jessie Y. ;
Kerns, James R. ;
Nute, Jessica L. ;
Liu, Xinming ;
Balter, Peter A. ;
Stingo, Francesco C. ;
Followill, David S. ;
Mirkovic, Dragan ;
Howell, Rebecca M. ;
Kry, Stephen F. .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2015, 60 (03) :1047-1067
[9]   THE APPARENT INCIDENCE OF HIP FRACTURE IN EUROPE - A STUDY OF NATIONAL REGISTER SOURCES [J].
JOHNELL, O ;
GULLBERG, B ;
ALLANDER, E ;
KANIS, JA ;
DILZEN, G ;
GENNARI, C ;
LOPEZVAZ, AA ;
LYRITIS, G ;
MAZZUOLI, GF ;
MIRAVET, L ;
PASSERI, M ;
PEREZCANO, R ;
RAPADO, A ;
RIBOT, C ;
DEQUEKER, J ;
LOEW, D ;
KHALTAEV, N ;
PLUSS, M .
OSTEOPOROSIS INTERNATIONAL, 1992, 2 (06) :298-302
[10]   Value of 3D fluoroscopic imaging of acetabular fractures comparison to 2D fluoroscopy and CT imaging [J].
Kendoff, D. ;
Gardner, M. J. ;
Citak, M. ;
Kfuri, M., Jr. ;
Thumes, B. ;
Krettek, C. ;
Huefner, T. .
ARCHIVES OF ORTHOPAEDIC AND TRAUMA SURGERY, 2008, 128 (06) :599-605