| Literature DB >> 33490168 |
Dejian Liu1, Yanlin Li1, Tao Li2, Yang Yu1, Guofeng Cai1, Guiran Yang1, Guoliang Wang1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To explore the location accuracy and early clinical outcomes of using a 3D-printed individualized navigation template to assist in the reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL).Entities:
Keywords: Printing; anterior cruciate ligament (ACL); arthroscopy; precision medicine; spatial navigation; three-dimensional
Year: 2020 PMID: 33490168 PMCID: PMC7812217 DOI: 10.21037/atm-20-7515
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Transl Med ISSN: 2305-5839
Figure 1Construction of the affected ACL model using bilateral knee images (image fusion technology). (A) The 3D reconstruction model of the bilateral knee joints; (B) Point registration of the bilateral knee bones; (C) the healthy knee ACL mirror image was used to obtain a model of the affected ACL; (D) the affected bone and ACL model. 3D, three-dimensional; ACL, anterior cruciate ligament.
Figure 2The design of the 3D-printed navigation template of the femur (A) and the tibia (B); arthroscopic views of the intraoperative use of the 3D-printed navigation template of the femur (C) and the tibia (D); arthroscopic view of the graft after reconstruction (E). 3D, three-dimensional.
Figure 3The grid method was used to quantify the position of the center point of the femoral tunnel (A) and the tibial tunnel (B).
Patient demographics
| Variable | All (n=41) | Conventional group (n=19) | 3D group (n=22) | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender, n (%) | 0.892 | |||
| Male | 23 (56.1) | 11 (57.9) | 12 (54.5) | |
| Female | 18 (43.9) | 8 (42.1) | 10 (45.5) | |
| Age (years) | 26.0±4.1 | 26.8±4.5 | 25.3±3.7 | 0.220 |
| Causes of injury, n (%) | 0.572 | |||
| Traffic accident | 5 (12.2) | 2 (10.5) | 3 (13.6) | |
| Sports injury | 36 (87.8) | 17 (89.5) | 19 (86.4) | |
| Knee, n (%) | 0.647 | |||
| Left | 20 (48.8) | 10 (52.6) | 10 (45.5) | |
| Right | 21 (51.2) | 9 (47.4) | 12 (54.5) | |
| Time to surgery (weeks) | 3.2±1.8 | 3.2±1.9 | 3.2±1.7 | 0.903 |
| Intraoperative positioning time (min) | 4.5±1.9 | 5.9±1.8 | 3.3±1.0 | <0.001 |
Figure 4A flow diagram showing the inclusion of patients in the study. ACL, anterior cruciate ligament.
Comparison of the actual tunnel position with the expected position obtained from the model (n=22)
| Percentage of bone tunnel insertion point | Preoperative design | Postoperative actual position | P |
|---|---|---|---|
| Femoral tunnel | |||
| Depth (d/D) (%) | 27.8±4.4 | 27.6±4.2 | 0.651 |
| Height (h/H) (%) | 36.4±8.6 | 36.0±8.1 | 0.643 |
| Tibial tunnel | |||
| Sagittal plane (s/S) (%) | 38.6±1.6 | 38.1±2.2 | 0.271 |
| Coronal plane (c/C) (%) | 47.5±1.7 | 47.2±1.9 | 0.265 |
d/D, h/H, s/S and c/C can be seen in . d/D, percentage of the depth of the femoral tunnel insertion point; h/H, percentage of the height of the femoral tunnel insertion point; s/S, percentage of the sagittal plane of the tibial tunnel insertion point; c/C, percentage of the coronal plane of the tibial tunnel insertion point.
Figure 5A comparison of the center point position of the femoral insertion point (A) and the tibial insertion point (B) in the 3D group and the conventional group.
Comparison of post-operative tunnel position between two groups (n=41)
| Percentage of bone tunnel insertion point | Conventional group (n=19) | 3D group (n=22) | P |
|---|---|---|---|
| Femoral tunnel | |||
| Depth (d/D) (%) | 30.4±3.7 | 27.6±4.2 | 0.025 |
| Height (h/H) (%) | 40.7±6.4 | 36.0±8.1 | 0.045 |
| Tibial tunnel | |||
| Sagittal plane (s/S) (%) | 36.5±2.6 | 38.1±2.2 | 0.038 |
| Coronal plane (c/C) (%) | 45.3±2.5 | 47.2±1.9 | 0.010 |
d/D, h/H, s/S, and c/C can be seen in . d/D, percentage of the depth of the femoral tunnel insertion point; h/H, percentage of the height of the femoral tunnel insertion point; s/S, percentage of the sagittal plane of the tibial tunnel insertion point; c/C, percentage of the coronal plane of the tibial tunnel insertion point.
Comparison of the knee joint function between the two groups (n=41)
| Function scores | Conventional group (n=19) | 3D group (n=22) | P |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lysholm score | |||
| Pre-operation | 46.89±4.08 | 46.68±4.25 | 0.871 |
| 6 months post-operation | 80.21±5.37 | 81.16±4.23 | 0.347 |
| 12 months post-operation | 81.26±5.31 | 82.00±4.39 | 0.303 |
| Statistics | F=295.465, P<0.001 | F=474.825, P<0.001 | |
| IKDC score | |||
| Pre-operation | 45.58±5.75 | 45.86±5.15 | 0.868 |
| 6 months post-operation | 82.94±3.48 | 83.91±3.15 | 0.339 |
| 12 months post-operation | 85.68±5.58 | 87.23±5.60 | 0.380 |
| Statistics | F=374.845, P<0.001 | F=520.621, P<0.001 |
IKDC, International Knee Documentation Committee scores.