| Literature DB >> 28149191 |
Epitácio Leite Rolim1, Marcelo Raul Cavalcanti Torres2, Mauriston Renan Martins Silva2, Filipe Ramos Lima2, José Lamartine DE Andrade Aguiar1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To present a simplified calculation for the measurement of osteotomy wedges used for the correction of angular uniplanar deformities of long bones and to compare the simplified calculation proposed (circumferential calculation) with the classical trigonometric calculations, as well as with the exact calculation performed by computer software AutoCADtm.Entities:
Keywords: Osteotomy/methods. Bone and bones/abnormalities. Surgical procedures; operative.
Year: 2016 PMID: 28149191 PMCID: PMC5266656 DOI: 10.1590/1413-785220162405160466
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Ortop Bras ISSN: 1413-7852 Impact factor: 0.513
Figure 1Model used as standard. In this example, the hypothetical angle of the bone deformity was 30°.
Figure 3Model used for defining the exact dimensions of the wedge through AutoCADtm software in a deformity with a hypothetical angle of 30°.
Figure 4(A) Model used to calculate the base length of an opening cuneiform osteotomy, with angle of 30° and bone diameter 40mm. (B) Same model after the opening cuneiform osteotomy and deformity correction. Note the trigonometric formula used to calculate the wedge base (BC).
Results of measurements (mm) of the length of corrective bone wedges obtained by exact calculation (AutoCADtm), circumferential and trigonometric methods.
| Deformity angle (degrees) | Measurements (mm) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Exact method (AutoCAD) | Circumferential method | Trigonometric method | |
| 5 | 3.493 | 3.491 | 3.490 |
| 10 | 6.99 | 6.98 | 6.97 |
| 15 | 10.53 | 10.47 | 10.44 |
| 20 | 14.10 | 13.96 | 13.89 |
| 25 | 17.73 | 17.45 | 17.31 |
| 30 | 21.43 | 20.94 | 20.70 |
| 35 | 25.22 | 24.43 | 24.05 |
| 40 | 29.11 | 27.92 | 27.36 |
| 45 | 33.13 | 31.41 | 30.61 |
| 50 | 37.30 | 34.90 | 33.80 |
| 55 | 41.64 | 38.39 | 36.94 |
| 60 | 46.18 | 41.88 | 40.00 |
| 65 | 50.96 | 45.37 | 42.98 |
| 70 | 56.01 | 48.86 | 45.88 |
| 75 | 61.38 | 52.36 | 48.70 |
| 80 | 67.12 | 55.85 | 51.42 |
| 85 | 73.30 | 59.34 | 54.04 |
| 90 | 80.00 | 62.83 | 56.56 |
| Mean | 35.22 | 33.16 | 32.21 |
| SD | 23.52 | 18.63 | 16.81 |
|
| 0.6364 | ||
SD: Standard deviation; p Tukey's test; p>0.05, there was no statistically significant difference.
Figure 5(A, B, C and D). Examples of four hypothetic models produced in AutoCADtm of femurs with angular deformities corrected through bone wedges which lengths were calculated by the three methods presented in this study. (A) Bone deformity of 10°; (B) Bone deformity of 30°; (C) Bone deformity of 45°; (D) Bone deformity of 60°.