Literature DB >> 30820811

CT-Based 3D Printing of the Glenoid Prior to Shoulder Arthroplasty: Bony Morphology and Model Evaluation.

Kenneth C Wang1,2, Anja Jones3, Shivkumar Kambhampati4, Mohit N Gilotra5,6, Peter C Liacouras7, Satre Stuelke8, Brian Shiu6, Natalie Leong5,6, S Ashfaq Hasan5,6, Eliot L Siegel5,9.   

Abstract

To demonstrate the 3D printed appearance of glenoid morphologies relevant to shoulder replacement surgery and to evaluate the benefits of printed models of the glenoid with regard to surgical planning. A retrospective review of patients referred for shoulder CT was performed, leading to a cohort of nine patients without arthroplasty hardware and exhibiting glenoid changes relevant to shoulder arthroplasty planning. Thin slice CT images were used to create both humerus-subtracted volume renderings of the glenoid, as well as 3D surface models of the glenoid, and 11 printed models were created. Volume renderings, surface models, and printed models were reviewed by a musculoskeletal radiologist for accuracy. Four fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeons specializing in shoulder surgery reviewed each case individually as follows: First, the source CT images were reviewed, and a score for the clarity of the bony morphologies relevant to shoulder arthroplasty surgery was given. The volume rendering was reviewed, and the clarity was again scored. Finally, the printed model was reviewed, and the clarity again scored. Each printed model was also scored for morphologic complexity, expected usefulness of the printed model, and physical properties of the model. Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon signed rank tests of the clarity scores were calculated, and the Spearman's ρ correlation coefficient between complexity and usefulness scores was computed. Printed models demonstrated a range of glenoid bony changes including osteophytes, glenoid bone loss, retroversion, and biconcavity. Surgeons rated the glenoid morphology as more clear after review of humerus-subtracted volume rendering, compared with review of the source CT images (p = 0.00903). Clarity was also better with 3D printed models compared to CT (p = 0.00903) and better with 3D printed models compared to humerus-subtracted volume rendering (p = 0. 00879). The expected usefulness of printed models demonstrated a positive correlation with morphologic complexity, with Spearman's ρ 0.73 (p = 0.0108). 3D printing of the glenoid based on pre-operative CT provides a physical representation of patient anatomy. Printed models enabled shoulder surgeons to appreciate glenoid bony morphology more clearly compared to review of CT images or humerus-subtracted volume renderings. These models were more useful as glenoid complexity increased.

Entities:  

Keywords:  3D printing; Computed tomography; Glenoid morphology; Shoulder arthroplasty; Surgical planning

Year:  2019        PMID: 30820811      PMCID: PMC6737174          DOI: 10.1007/s10278-019-00177-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Digit Imaging        ISSN: 0897-1889            Impact factor:   4.056


  33 in total

1.  Multidetector CT angiography of pancreatic carcinoma: part I, evaluation of arterial involvement.

Authors:  Karen M Horton; Elliot K Fishman
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 3.959

2.  The use of computerized tomography in the measurement of glenoid version.

Authors:  R J Friedman; K B Hawthorne; B M Genez
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1992-08       Impact factor: 5.284

Review 3.  Grammont reverse prosthesis: design, rationale, and biomechanics.

Authors:  Pascal Boileau; Duncan J Watkinson; Armodios M Hatzidakis; Frederic Balg
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2005 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.019

Review 4.  Arthroplasty of the shoulder.

Authors:  P Boileau; R J Sinnerton; C Chuinard; G Walch
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2006-05

5.  The Reverse Shoulder Prosthesis for glenohumeral arthritis associated with severe rotator cuff deficiency. A minimum two-year follow-up study of sixty patients.

Authors:  Mark Frankle; Steven Siegal; Derek Pupello; Arif Saleem; Mark Mighell; Matthew Vasey
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 5.284

6.  Evaluation of three-dimensional glenoid structure using MRI.

Authors:  H Inui; K Sugamoto; T Miyamoto; A Machida; J Hashimoto; K Nobuhara
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 2.610

7.  Functional outcome after shoulder arthroplasty for primary osteoarthritis: a multicenter study.

Authors:  Tom R Norris; Joseph P Iannotti
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2002 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.019

8.  Glenoid size, inclination, and version: an anatomic study.

Authors:  R S Churchill; J J Brems; H Kotschi
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2001 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.019

9.  Bone grafting for glenoid deficiency in total shoulder replacement.

Authors:  S P Steinmann; R H Cofield
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2000 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.019

Review 10.  Computed tomography scanning for endograft planning: evolving toward three-dimensional, single source imaging.

Authors:  Hugh G Beebe; Boonprasit Kritpracha
Journal:  Semin Vasc Surg       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 1.000

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Glenoid bony morphology of osteoarthritis prior to shoulder arthroplasty: what the surgeon wants to know and why.

Authors:  Lawrence Lo; Scott Koenig; Natalie L Leong; Brian B Shiu; S Ashfaq Hasan; Mohit N Gilotra; Kenneth C Wang
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2020-10-23       Impact factor: 2.199

2.  Restoring Rotation Center in Total Hip Arthroplasty for Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip with the Assistance of Three Dimensional Printing Technology: A Pilot Study.

Authors:  Heng Zhang; Jian-Zhong Guan; Zheng Zhang; Xiao-Tian Chen; Xiao-Dong Ma; Jian-Ning Zhao; Jian-Sheng Zhou
Journal:  Orthop Surg       Date:  2021-12-13       Impact factor: 2.071

3.  The clinical performance of ultra-low-dose shoulder CT scans: The assessment on image and physical 3D printing models.

Authors:  Ming Lei; Meng Zhang; Niyuan Luo; Jingzhi Ye; Fenghuan Lin; Yanxia Chen; Jun Chen; Mengqiang Xiao
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-09-26       Impact factor: 3.752

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.