Computer-aided pelvic reduction frame for anatomical closed reduction of unstable pelvic fractures

ABSTRACT Traditional closed reductions of unstable pelvic fractures are mainly performed by surgeons using manual manipulation and subjective verification based on intra‐operative roentgenography. It is difficult to perform an accurate closed reduction because of a lack of adequate knowledge of the...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of orthopaedic research 2016-01, Vol.34 (1), p.81-87
Hauptverfasser: Zhang, Li-hai, Zhao, Jing-xin, Zhao, Zhe, Su, Xiu-yun, Zhang, Li-cheng, Zhao, Yan-peng, Tang, Pei-fu
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:ABSTRACT Traditional closed reductions of unstable pelvic fractures are mainly performed by surgeons using manual manipulation and subjective verification based on intra‐operative roentgenography. It is difficult to perform an accurate closed reduction because of a lack of adequate knowledge of the displacement patterns and an inability to apply the reduction in correct direction. Using the concept of the remote center of motion mechanism and computer‐aided design software, we developed a pelvic reduction frame for use in anatomical closed reductions of unstable pelvic fractures. With three‐dimensional reconstruction technique and the matrix algorithm, the spatial orientation of the displaced hemipelvis can be calculated and deconstructed into several rotational and translational movements that can be completed with the frame. To verify the accuracy of this system, the rotations were repeated 10 times in arbitrary degrees and directions. After the matrix is calculated, the displaced hemipelvis can be reduced to the anatomical position using our frame. The maximum residual translational and rotational displacements were less than 5 mm and 4 degrees, which indicated the accuracy of this system. The maximum average residual translation and rotation were 1.87 mm in Z‐axis (ranging: 4.63–0.1 mm) and 1.1 degrees around Y‐axis (ranging: 3.81–0.13 degrees), respectively. Only the Z‐axial translation showed a statistically significant difference (p 
ISSN:0736-0266
1554-527X
DOI:10.1002/jor.22987