Comparison of intraoperative 2D vs. 3D imaging in open reduction and fixation of distal radius fractures
Purpose In the volar plating of distal radius fractures, intraoperative three-dimensional (3D) imaging is designed to allow better judgment regarding screw and implant positioning compared with conventional intraoperative two-dimensional (2D) imaging. We evaluated the impact of these two imaging mod...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | European journal of trauma and emergency surgery (Munich : 2007) 2020-06, Vol.46 (3), p.557-563 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 563 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 557 |
| container_title | European journal of trauma and emergency surgery (Munich : 2007) |
| container_volume | 46 |
| creator | Hammerle, Diego Osterhoff, Georg Allemann, Florin Werner, Clement Max Léonard |
| description | Purpose
In the volar plating of distal radius fractures, intraoperative three-dimensional (3D) imaging is designed to allow better judgment regarding screw and implant positioning compared with conventional intraoperative two-dimensional (2D) imaging. We evaluated the impact of these two imaging modalities on the rates of intraoperative revision and secondary surgery, as well as the need for implant removal during follow-up.
Methods
A retrospective analysis of consecutive patients who underwent volar plate osteosynthesis for isolated distal radius fractures between January 2008 and April 2016 was performed. Patient files were evaluated for intraoperative imaging findings, intraoperative and postoperative revision rates, and implant removal during follow-up. Additional analyses of radiation exposure, operation time, and hospitalization time were performed.
Results
A total of 314 patients were analyzed (mean age: 54 ± 19 years; 210 females). For 246 patients, only 2D imaging was performed, while the remaining 68 patients underwent both 2D and 3D imaging (O-Arm, Medtronic). The intraoperative revision rate was significantly (
p
|
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00068-018-1036-2 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2179222835</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2179222835</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-1f629cffe34f48745fe0d62ab5457a75a28eeb2eb35d117909c5f534010093c23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kUtLAzEUhYMotlZ_gBsJuHEzNY_JPJbS-oKCG12HTCapKTPJmMwU_femTlUQXCXhfufkcg4A5xjNMUL5dUAIZUWCcJFgRLOEHIApLjKalGWKD3_ulE7ASQibCKOMkWMwoYiyqGVT8LpwbSe8Cc5Cp6GxvReuU170ZqsgWcJtmEO6hKYVa2PXEYBxbKFX9SB7E1XC1lCbd_H1iBa1Cb1ooBe1GQLUXsh-8CqcgiMtmqDO9ucMvNzdPi8ektXT_ePiZpVImpM-wTojpdRa0VSnRZ4yrVCdEVGxlOUiZ4IUSlVEVZTVGOclKiXTjKYoBlJSSegMXI2-nXdvgwo9b02QqmmEVW4InEQRIaSgLKKXf9CNG7yN20WK0LLEDBeRwiMlvQvBK807H9PwHxwjvquBjzXwWAPf1cB3S1zsnYeqVfWP4jv3CJARCHFk18r_fv2_6ycN-ZFY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2123991518</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of intraoperative 2D vs. 3D imaging in open reduction and fixation of distal radius fractures</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Hammerle, Diego ; Osterhoff, Georg ; Allemann, Florin ; Werner, Clement Max Léonard</creator><creatorcontrib>Hammerle, Diego ; Osterhoff, Georg ; Allemann, Florin ; Werner, Clement Max Léonard</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose
In the volar plating of distal radius fractures, intraoperative three-dimensional (3D) imaging is designed to allow better judgment regarding screw and implant positioning compared with conventional intraoperative two-dimensional (2D) imaging. We evaluated the impact of these two imaging modalities on the rates of intraoperative revision and secondary surgery, as well as the need for implant removal during follow-up.
Methods
A retrospective analysis of consecutive patients who underwent volar plate osteosynthesis for isolated distal radius fractures between January 2008 and April 2016 was performed. Patient files were evaluated for intraoperative imaging findings, intraoperative and postoperative revision rates, and implant removal during follow-up. Additional analyses of radiation exposure, operation time, and hospitalization time were performed.
Results
A total of 314 patients were analyzed (mean age: 54 ± 19 years; 210 females). For 246 patients, only 2D imaging was performed, while the remaining 68 patients underwent both 2D and 3D imaging (O-Arm, Medtronic). The intraoperative revision rate was significantly (
p
< 0.001) higher with 3D imaging (32.4%) compared with 2D imaging (2.0%). The postoperative revision rates were similar between both the groups (2.9% vs. 2.0%;
p
= 0.674). Compared with 2D imaging, the use of the Medtronic O-Arm resulted in a significantly lower implant removal rate (8.8% vs. 18.7%;
p
= 0.036) during follow-up.
Conclusion
Compared with conventional 2D imaging, the use of intraoperative 3D imaging significantly increased the intraoperative revision rate and has the potential for positive long-term effects for lowering the risk of requiring an implant removal.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1863-9933</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1863-9941</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00068-018-1036-2</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30350005</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Bone Plates ; Bone Screws ; Chemical industry ; Critical Care Medicine ; Emergency Medicine ; Female ; Fractures ; Humans ; Imaging, Three-Dimensional ; Intensive ; Intraoperative Period ; Male ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Middle Aged ; Open Fracture Reduction - methods ; Original Article ; Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted ; Radius Fractures - diagnostic imaging ; Radius Fractures - surgery ; Retrospective Studies ; Sports Medicine ; Surgery ; Surgery, Computer-Assisted - methods ; Surgical Orthopedics ; Three dimensional imaging ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods ; Traumatic Surgery</subject><ispartof>European journal of trauma and emergency surgery (Munich : 2007), 2020-06, Vol.46 (3), p.557-563</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018</rights><rights>Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-1f629cffe34f48745fe0d62ab5457a75a28eeb2eb35d117909c5f534010093c23</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-1f629cffe34f48745fe0d62ab5457a75a28eeb2eb35d117909c5f534010093c23</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00068-018-1036-2$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00068-018-1036-2$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924,41487,42556,51318</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30350005$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hammerle, Diego</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Osterhoff, Georg</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Allemann, Florin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Werner, Clement Max Léonard</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of intraoperative 2D vs. 3D imaging in open reduction and fixation of distal radius fractures</title><title>European journal of trauma and emergency surgery (Munich : 2007)</title><addtitle>Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg</addtitle><addtitle>Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg</addtitle><description>Purpose
In the volar plating of distal radius fractures, intraoperative three-dimensional (3D) imaging is designed to allow better judgment regarding screw and implant positioning compared with conventional intraoperative two-dimensional (2D) imaging. We evaluated the impact of these two imaging modalities on the rates of intraoperative revision and secondary surgery, as well as the need for implant removal during follow-up.
Methods
A retrospective analysis of consecutive patients who underwent volar plate osteosynthesis for isolated distal radius fractures between January 2008 and April 2016 was performed. Patient files were evaluated for intraoperative imaging findings, intraoperative and postoperative revision rates, and implant removal during follow-up. Additional analyses of radiation exposure, operation time, and hospitalization time were performed.
Results
A total of 314 patients were analyzed (mean age: 54 ± 19 years; 210 females). For 246 patients, only 2D imaging was performed, while the remaining 68 patients underwent both 2D and 3D imaging (O-Arm, Medtronic). The intraoperative revision rate was significantly (
p
< 0.001) higher with 3D imaging (32.4%) compared with 2D imaging (2.0%). The postoperative revision rates were similar between both the groups (2.9% vs. 2.0%;
p
= 0.674). Compared with 2D imaging, the use of the Medtronic O-Arm resulted in a significantly lower implant removal rate (8.8% vs. 18.7%;
p
= 0.036) during follow-up.
Conclusion
Compared with conventional 2D imaging, the use of intraoperative 3D imaging significantly increased the intraoperative revision rate and has the potential for positive long-term effects for lowering the risk of requiring an implant removal.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Bone Plates</subject><subject>Bone Screws</subject><subject>Chemical industry</subject><subject>Critical Care Medicine</subject><subject>Emergency Medicine</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fractures</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Imaging, Three-Dimensional</subject><subject>Intensive</subject><subject>Intraoperative Period</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Open Fracture Reduction - methods</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted</subject><subject>Radius Fractures - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Radius Fractures - surgery</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Sports Medicine</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgery, Computer-Assisted - methods</subject><subject>Surgical Orthopedics</subject><subject>Three dimensional imaging</subject><subject>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</subject><subject>Traumatic Surgery</subject><issn>1863-9933</issn><issn>1863-9941</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kUtLAzEUhYMotlZ_gBsJuHEzNY_JPJbS-oKCG12HTCapKTPJmMwU_femTlUQXCXhfufkcg4A5xjNMUL5dUAIZUWCcJFgRLOEHIApLjKalGWKD3_ulE7ASQibCKOMkWMwoYiyqGVT8LpwbSe8Cc5Cp6GxvReuU170ZqsgWcJtmEO6hKYVa2PXEYBxbKFX9SB7E1XC1lCbd_H1iBa1Cb1ooBe1GQLUXsh-8CqcgiMtmqDO9ucMvNzdPi8ektXT_ePiZpVImpM-wTojpdRa0VSnRZ4yrVCdEVGxlOUiZ4IUSlVEVZTVGOclKiXTjKYoBlJSSegMXI2-nXdvgwo9b02QqmmEVW4InEQRIaSgLKKXf9CNG7yN20WK0LLEDBeRwiMlvQvBK807H9PwHxwjvquBjzXwWAPf1cB3S1zsnYeqVfWP4jv3CJARCHFk18r_fv2_6ycN-ZFY</recordid><startdate>20200601</startdate><enddate>20200601</enddate><creator>Hammerle, Diego</creator><creator>Osterhoff, Georg</creator><creator>Allemann, Florin</creator><creator>Werner, Clement Max Léonard</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20200601</creationdate><title>Comparison of intraoperative 2D vs. 3D imaging in open reduction and fixation of distal radius fractures</title><author>Hammerle, Diego ; Osterhoff, Georg ; Allemann, Florin ; Werner, Clement Max Léonard</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-1f629cffe34f48745fe0d62ab5457a75a28eeb2eb35d117909c5f534010093c23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Bone Plates</topic><topic>Bone Screws</topic><topic>Chemical industry</topic><topic>Critical Care Medicine</topic><topic>Emergency Medicine</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fractures</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Imaging, Three-Dimensional</topic><topic>Intensive</topic><topic>Intraoperative Period</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Open Fracture Reduction - methods</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted</topic><topic>Radius Fractures - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Radius Fractures - surgery</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Sports Medicine</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgery, Computer-Assisted - methods</topic><topic>Surgical Orthopedics</topic><topic>Three dimensional imaging</topic><topic>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</topic><topic>Traumatic Surgery</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hammerle, Diego</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Osterhoff, Georg</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Allemann, Florin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Werner, Clement Max Léonard</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>European journal of trauma and emergency surgery (Munich : 2007)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hammerle, Diego</au><au>Osterhoff, Georg</au><au>Allemann, Florin</au><au>Werner, Clement Max Léonard</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of intraoperative 2D vs. 3D imaging in open reduction and fixation of distal radius fractures</atitle><jtitle>European journal of trauma and emergency surgery (Munich : 2007)</jtitle><stitle>Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg</stitle><addtitle>Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg</addtitle><date>2020-06-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>46</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>557</spage><epage>563</epage><pages>557-563</pages><issn>1863-9933</issn><eissn>1863-9941</eissn><abstract>Purpose
In the volar plating of distal radius fractures, intraoperative three-dimensional (3D) imaging is designed to allow better judgment regarding screw and implant positioning compared with conventional intraoperative two-dimensional (2D) imaging. We evaluated the impact of these two imaging modalities on the rates of intraoperative revision and secondary surgery, as well as the need for implant removal during follow-up.
Methods
A retrospective analysis of consecutive patients who underwent volar plate osteosynthesis for isolated distal radius fractures between January 2008 and April 2016 was performed. Patient files were evaluated for intraoperative imaging findings, intraoperative and postoperative revision rates, and implant removal during follow-up. Additional analyses of radiation exposure, operation time, and hospitalization time were performed.
Results
A total of 314 patients were analyzed (mean age: 54 ± 19 years; 210 females). For 246 patients, only 2D imaging was performed, while the remaining 68 patients underwent both 2D and 3D imaging (O-Arm, Medtronic). The intraoperative revision rate was significantly (
p
< 0.001) higher with 3D imaging (32.4%) compared with 2D imaging (2.0%). The postoperative revision rates were similar between both the groups (2.9% vs. 2.0%;
p
= 0.674). Compared with 2D imaging, the use of the Medtronic O-Arm resulted in a significantly lower implant removal rate (8.8% vs. 18.7%;
p
= 0.036) during follow-up.
Conclusion
Compared with conventional 2D imaging, the use of intraoperative 3D imaging significantly increased the intraoperative revision rate and has the potential for positive long-term effects for lowering the risk of requiring an implant removal.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><pmid>30350005</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00068-018-1036-2</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1863-9933 |
| ispartof | European journal of trauma and emergency surgery (Munich : 2007), 2020-06, Vol.46 (3), p.557-563 |
| issn | 1863-9933 1863-9941 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2179222835 |
| source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
| subjects | Adolescent Adult Aged Aged, 80 and over Bone Plates Bone Screws Chemical industry Critical Care Medicine Emergency Medicine Female Fractures Humans Imaging, Three-Dimensional Intensive Intraoperative Period Male Medicine Medicine & Public Health Middle Aged Open Fracture Reduction - methods Original Article Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted Radius Fractures - diagnostic imaging Radius Fractures - surgery Retrospective Studies Sports Medicine Surgery Surgery, Computer-Assisted - methods Surgical Orthopedics Three dimensional imaging Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods Traumatic Surgery |
| title | Comparison of intraoperative 2D vs. 3D imaging in open reduction and fixation of distal radius fractures |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-09T04%3A51%3A42IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20intraoperative%202D%20vs.%203D%20imaging%20in%20open%20reduction%20and%20fixation%20of%20distal%20radius%20fractures&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20trauma%20and%20emergency%20surgery%20(Munich%20:%202007)&rft.au=Hammerle,%20Diego&rft.date=2020-06-01&rft.volume=46&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=557&rft.epage=563&rft.pages=557-563&rft.issn=1863-9933&rft.eissn=1863-9941&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00068-018-1036-2&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2179222835%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2123991518&rft_id=info:pmid/30350005&rfr_iscdi=true |