Literature DB >> 26148694

Patient-specific instrument can achieve same accuracy with less resection time than navigation assistance in periacetabular pelvic tumor surgery: a cadaveric study.

Kwok-Chuen Wong1, Kwan-Yik Sze2, Irene Oi-Ling Wong3, Chung-Ming Wong4, Shekhar-Madhukar Kumta5.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Inaccurate resection in pelvic tumors can result in compromised margins with increase local recurrence. Navigation-assisted and patient-specific instrument (PSI) techniques have recently been reported in assisting pelvic tumor surgery with the tendency of improving surgical accuracy. We examined and compared the accuracy of transferring a virtual pelvic resection plan to actual surgery using navigation-assisted or PSI technique in a cadaver study.
METHODS: We performed CT scan in twelve cadaveric bodies including whole pelvic bones. Either supraacetabular or partial acetabular resection was virtually planned in a hemipelvis using engineering software. The virtual resection plan was transferred to a CT-based navigation system or was used for design and fabrication of PSI. Pelvic resections were performed using navigation assistance in six cadavers and PSI in another six. Post-resection images were co-registered with preoperative planning for comparative analysis of resection accuracy in the two techniques.
RESULTS: The mean average deviation error from the planned resection was no different ([Formula: see text]) for the navigation and the PSI groups: 1.9 versus 1.4 mm, respectively. The mean time required for the bone resection was greater ([Formula: see text]) for the navigation group than for the PSI group: 16.2 versus 1.1 min, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: In simulated periacetabular pelvic tumor resections, PSI technique enabled surgeons to reproduce the virtual surgical plan with similar accuracy but with less bone resection time when compared with navigation assistance. Further studies are required to investigate the clinical benefits of PSI technique in pelvic tumor surgery.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Navigation assistance; Patient-specific instruments; Periacetabular pelvic tumors; Surgical accuracy

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26148694     DOI: 10.1007/s11548-015-1250-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg        ISSN: 1861-6410            Impact factor:   2.924


  25 in total

1.  Integration of CAD/CAM planning into computer assisted orthopaedic surgery.

Authors:  K C Wong; S M Kumta; K S Leung; K W Ng; E W K Ng; K S Lee
Journal:  Comput Aided Surg       Date:  2010-09-20

2.  Accuracy of 3-D planning and navigation in bone tumor resection.

Authors:  Lucas E Ritacco; Federico E Milano; Germán L Farfalli; Miguel A Ayerza; D Luis Muscolo; Luis A Aponte-Tinao
Journal:  Orthopedics       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 1.390

3.  Irregular osteotomy in limb salvage for juxta-articular osteosarcoma under computer-assisted navigation.

Authors:  Jing Li; Zhen Wang; Zheng Guo; Guo-Jing Chen; Ming Yang; Guo-Xian Pei
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2012-03-22       Impact factor: 3.454

4.  Distal radius osteotomy with volar locking plates based on computer simulation.

Authors:  Junichi Miyake; Tsuyoshi Murase; Hisao Moritomo; Kazuomi Sugamoto; Hideki Yoshikawa
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-01-04       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Surgical technique: Computer-generated custom jigs improve accuracy of wide resection of bone tumors.

Authors:  Fazel A Khan; Joseph D Lipman; Andrew D Pearle; Patrick J Boland; John H Healey
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-01-05       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Improved accuracy of alignment with patient-specific positioning guides compared with manual instrumentation in TKA.

Authors:  Vincent Y Ng; Jeffrey H DeClaire; Keith R Berend; Bethany C Gulick; Adolph V Lombardi
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Can computer navigation-assisted surgery reduce the risk of an intralesional margin and reduce the rate of local recurrence in patients with a tumour of the pelvis or sacrum?

Authors:  L Jeys; G S Matharu; R S Nandra; R J Grimer
Journal:  Bone Joint J       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 5.082

8.  The outcomes of navigation-assisted bone tumour surgery: minimum three-year follow-up.

Authors:  H S Cho; J H Oh; I Han; H-S Kim
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2012-10

9.  A novel patient-specific navigational template for cervical pedicle screw placement.

Authors:  Sheng Lu; Yong Q Xu; William W Lu; Guo X Ni; Yan B Li; Ji H Shi; Dong P Li; Guo P Chen; Yu B Chen; Yuan Z Zhang
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2009-12-15       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Surgical inaccuracy of tumor resection and reconstruction within the pelvis: an experimental study.

Authors:  Olivier Cartiaux; Pierre-Louis Docquier; Laurent Paul; Bernard G Francq; Olivier H Cornu; Christian Delloye; Benoit Raucent; Bruno Dehez; Xavier Banse
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 3.717

View more
  22 in total

1.  Are Skin Fiducials Comparable to Bone Fiducials for Registration When Planning Navigation-assisted Musculoskeletal Tumor Resections in a Cadaveric Simulated Tumor Model?

Authors:  Rodolfo Zamora; Stephanie E Punt; Claudia Christman-Skieller; Cengiz Yildirim; John C Shapton; Ernest U Conrad
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Computer-assisted surgical planning of complex bone tumor resections improves negative margin outcomes in a sawbones model.

Authors:  Amir Sternheim; Dani Rotman; Prakash Nayak; Michelle Arkhangorodsky; Michael J Daly; Jonathan C Irish; Peter C Ferguson; Jay S Wunder
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2021-03-16       Impact factor: 2.924

3.  Error range in proximal femoral osteotomy using computer tomography-based navigation.

Authors:  Masaki Takao; Takashi Sakai; Hidetoshi Hamada; Nobuhiko Sugano
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2017-04-01       Impact factor: 2.924

4.  Virtual surgical planning and 3D printing in pediatric musculoskeletal oncological resections: a proof-of-concept description.

Authors:  Jayanthi Parthasarathy; Brandon Jonard; Mitchell Rees; Bhavani Selvaraj; Thomas Scharschmidt
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2022-09-24       Impact factor: 3.421

5.  Three-dimensional printing technolgy in orthopedic oncology.

Authors:  Yongsung Kim
Journal:  Clin Exp Pediatr       Date:  2022-05-11

6.  Patient-specific desktop 3D-printed guides for pelvic tumour resection surgery: a precision study on cadavers.

Authors:  Mónica García-Sevilla; Lydia Mediavilla-Santos; María Teresa Ruiz-Alba; Rubén Pérez-Mañanes; José Antonio Calvo-Haro; Javier Pascau
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2021-02-22       Impact factor: 2.924

Review 7.  The evolution of three-dimensional technology in musculoskeletal oncology.

Authors:  Vishaal Nanik Thadani; Muhammad Jahangir Riaz; Gurpal Singh
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2018-07-25

8.  Application of 3-dimensional printing implants for bone tumors.

Authors:  Jong Woong Park; Hyun Guy Kang
Journal:  Clin Exp Pediatr       Date:  2021-12-23

9.  Tumor resection at the pelvis using three-dimensional planning and patient-specific instruments: a case series.

Authors:  Thorsten Jentzsch; Lazaros Vlachopoulos; Philipp Fürnstahl; Daniel A Müller; Bruno Fuchs
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2016-09-21       Impact factor: 2.754

10.  Complex joint-preserving bone tumor resection and reconstruction using computer navigation and 3D-printed patient-specific guides: A technical note of three cases.

Authors:  Kwok Chuen Wong; Louis Kwan Yik Sze; Shekhar Madhukar Kumta
Journal:  J Orthop Translat       Date:  2021-06-24       Impact factor: 5.191

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.