Literature DB >> 26655517

Correct Positioning of Percutaneous Iliosacral Screws With Computer-Navigated Versus Fluoroscopically Guided Surgery in Traumatic Pelvic Ring Fractures.

Jan Verbeek1, Erik Hermans, Arie van Vugt, Jan Paul Frölke.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess the correct positioning of iliosacral screw in patients with unstable traumatic pelvic ring injury by comparing fluoroscopically guided computer-navigated surgery (CNS) with conventional fluoroscopy (CF) through reviewing postoperative computed tomography (CT) and clinical indicators.
DESIGN: A comparative multicenter cohort study.
SETTING: Two level I Trauma Centers in the Netherlands. PATIENTS: The computer-navigated group (n = 56) and the CF group (n = 24) were comparable regarding age (mean, 43 years), sex (58%, male), body mass index (25 kg/m), injury severity score (27), injury-to-surgery interval (7 days), and Orthopaedic Trauma Association classification (40% 61-B, 60% 61-C). MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The position of the iliosacral screws was evaluated on postoperative CT. In addition, clinical morbidity and reoperation were assessed.
RESULTS: In the CNS group, a total of 111 screws were placed (2.0 per patient), of which 83% were placed correctly. In the CF group, 39 screws (1.6 per patient) were placed, 82% of them correctly.Inadequate fixation included neural foramina hit [12 screws (11%) in the CNS group versus 3 screws (8%) in the CF group, P = 0.76] and extraosseous dislocation [7 screws (6%) vs. 4 screws (10%), respectively, P = 0.47]. Five patients required reoperation, all in the CNS group, P = 0.32. We observed more adequate positioning with increased surgical experience, P = 0.12.
CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to what has been suggested by previous studies, we found no benefit from computer-navigated iliosacral screw fixation compared with fluoroscopically guided surgery regarding the correct positioning of iliosacral screw on postoperative CT and related morbidity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26655517     DOI: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000000502

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orthop Trauma        ISSN: 0890-5339            Impact factor:   2.512


  6 in total

1.  In Reply.

Authors:  Ludwig Oberkircher
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2018-04-20       Impact factor: 5.594

Review 2.  Lateral compression type 1 (LC1) pelvic ring injuries: a spectrum of fracture types and treatment algorithms.

Authors:  Kenan Kuršumović; Michael Hadeed; James Bassett; Joshua A Parry; Peter Bates; Mehool R Acharya
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2021-04-16

3.  Accuracy of navigated and conventional iliosacral screw placement in B- and C-type pelvic ring fractures.

Authors:  Josephine Berger-Groch; Marie Lueers; Johannes Maria Rueger; Wolfgang Lehmann; Darius Thiesen; Jan Philipp Kolb; Maximilian Johannes Hartel; Lars Gerhard Grossterlinden
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2018-07-20       Impact factor: 3.693

4.  Comparative Study of Percutaneous Sacroiliac Screw with or without TiRobot Assistance for Treating Pelvic Posterior Ring Fractures.

Authors:  Tao Long; Kai-Nan Li; Jin-Hua Gao; Tian-Hu Liu; Jian-Song Mu; Xue-Jun Wang; Chao Peng; Zhi-Yong He
Journal:  Orthop Surg       Date:  2019-05-11       Impact factor: 2.071

5.  Robotic assisted fixation of sacral fractures: A pilot study.

Authors:  Yoram A Weil; Amal Khoury; Rami Mosheiff; Leon Kaplan; Meir Liebergall; Josh E Schroeder
Journal:  OTA Int       Date:  2019-12-06

6.  Differences in Accuracy and Radiation Dose in Placement of Iliosacral Screws: Comparison between 3D and 2D Fluoroscopy.

Authors:  Michał Kułakowski; Paweł Reichert; Karol Elster; Jarosław Witkowski; Paweł Ślęczka; Piotr Morasiewicz; Łukasz Oleksy; Aleksandra Królikowska
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-03-08       Impact factor: 4.241

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.