Literature DB >> 19535060

Roof-arc angle and weight-bearing area of the acetabulum.

Bavornrit Chuckpaiwong1, Pornsawat Suwanwong, Thossart Harnroongroj.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Unreduced fracture crossing the weight-bearing dome of the acetabulum leads to arthritis. Thus the integrity of the weight-bearing dome is considered to be an important prognostic indicator for acetabular fracture. The decision of whether or not to operate is based on the location of the fracture relative to the weight-bearing dome. A displaced fracture crossing the weight-bearing dome is an indication for surgery.
OBJECTIVE: To measure the medial, anterior, and posterior roof-arc angles that cross the weight-bearing dome.
METHODS: Twenty cadeveric hip joints were dissected and simulated transverse fractures of acetabuli through the transtectal area were made. The radiographic examinations were taken in three views: AP, obturator oblique, and iliac oblique. Roof-arc angle was measured in all three views (medial, anterior, and posterior).
RESULTS: The medial roof-arc angle was 46+/-6.3 degrees , anterior roof-arc angle was 52+/-7.0 degrees , and posterior roof-arc angle was 62 degrees +/-8.5 degrees .
CONCLUSIONS: In acetabular fracture, a medial roof-arc angle less than 46 degrees , an anterior roof-arc angle less than 52 degrees , or posterior roof-arc angle less than 61 degrees is considered to be involved in a weight-bearing area. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: These roof-arc angle values may be used as a surgical guideline for an acetabular fracture around the weight-bearing area.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19535060     DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2009.01.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Injury        ISSN: 0020-1383            Impact factor:   2.586


  6 in total

1.  Part 2: outcome of acetabular fractures and associated prognostic factors-a ten-year retrospective study of one hundred and fifty six operated cases with open reduction and internal fixation.

Authors:  Mehdi Boudissa; Sébastien Ruatti; Gael Kerschbaumer; Michel Milaire; Philippe Merloz; Jérôme Tonetti
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-12-21       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Acetabular roof arc angles and anatomic biomechanical superior acetabular weight bearing area.

Authors:  Thossart Harnroongroj; Montri Wattanakaewsripetch; Narumol Sudjai; Thos Harnroongroj
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 1.251

3.  Is It Possible and Safe to Perform Acetabular-preserving Resections for Malignant Neoplasms of the Periacetabular Region?

Authors:  Ying-Lee Lam; Raymond Yau; Kenneth W Y Ho; Ka-Lok Mak; Sin-Tak Fong; Timothy Y C So
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Minimally invasive treatment of both-column acetabular fractures through the Stoppa combined with iliac fossa approach.

Authors:  Ruipeng Zhang; Yingchao Yin; Shilun Li; Zhiyong Hou; Juan Wang; Wei Chen; Yingze Zhang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-08-14       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 5.  Evaluation of decision-making in the treatment of acetabular fractures.

Authors:  Christof Audretsch; Alexander Trulson; Andreas Höch; Steven C Herath; Tina Histing; Markus A Küper
Journal:  EFORT Open Rev       Date:  2022-01-11

6.  Minimally invasive surgical treatment of minimally displaced acetabular fractures does not improve pain, mobility or quality of life compared to conservative treatment: a matched-pair analysis of 50 patients.

Authors:  Benedict Swartman; Johanna Pelzer; Sven Yves Vetter; Nils Beisemann; Marc Schnetzke; Holger Keil; Paul Alfred Gruetzner; Jochen Franke
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2020-03-23       Impact factor: 2.359

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.