Traditional versus mirror three-dimensional printing technology for isolated acetabular fractures: a retrospective study with a median follow-up of 25 months

传统三维打印技术与镜像三维打印技术治疗孤立性髋臼骨折的比较:一项回顾性研究,中位随访时间为25个月。

阅读:1

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the outcomes of traditional three-dimensional (3D) printing technology (TPT) versus mirror 3D printing technology (MTT) in treating isolated acetabular fractures (IAFs). METHODS: Consecutive patients with an IAF treated by either TPT or MTT at our tertiary medical centre from 2012 to 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Follow-up was performed 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively and annually thereafter. The primary outcome was the Harris hip score (HHS), and the secondary outcomes were major intraoperative variables and key orthopaedic complications. RESULTS: One hundred fourteen eligible patients (114 hips) with an IAF (TPT, n = 56; MTT, n = 58) were evaluated. The median follow-up was 25 months (range, 21-28 months). At the last follow-up, the mean HHS was 82.46 ±14.70 for TPT and 86.30 ± 13.26 for MTT with a statistically significant difference. Significant differences were also detected in the major intraoperative variables (operation time, intraoperative blood loss, number of fluoroscopic screenings, and anatomical reduction number) and the major orthopaedic complications (loosening, implant failure, and heterotopic ossification). CONCLUSION: Compared with TPT, MTT tends to produce accurate IAF reduction and may result in better intraoperative variables and a lower rate of major orthopaedic complications.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。