| Literature DB >> 34124261 |
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to retrospectively evaluate the efficacy of 3D navigational template for Salter osteotomy of DDH in children.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34124261 PMCID: PMC8166498 DOI: 10.1155/2021/8832617
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Comparison of demographic data between two groups.
| Characteristics | Conventional group | Navigation template group |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean age (range) (years) | 3.7 ± 1.7 (2-6) | 3.9 ± 1.8 (2-6) | 0.678 |
| Gender, | 0.694 | ||
| Male | 5 (31.2) | 4 (25.0) | |
| Female | 11 (68.8) | 12 (75.0) | |
| Side, | 0.719 | ||
| Left | 9 (56.3) | 10 (62.5) | |
| Right | 7 (43.7) | 6 (37.5) | |
| Tönnis classification | 0.705 | ||
| II | 3 (18.8) | 4 (25.0) | |
| III | 8 (50.0) | 9 (56.2) | |
| IV | 5 (31.2) | 3 (18.8) | |
| Surgery history | 0.465 | ||
| Yes | 7 (43.7) | 5 (31.2) | |
| No | 9 (56.3) | 11 (68.8) | |
| Mean follow-up (years) | 2.9 ± 0.8 (2-5) | 2.7 ± 0.5 (2-4) | 0.551 |
Figure 1Design of navigational template for Salter osteotomy. (a–c) Simulate the angle of osteotomy using Imageware software. (d) The navigation template was designed with reverse modeling. (e, f) The corrective degree was simulated in the computer.
Figure 2The navigation template and intraoperative operation. (a, b) The template was produced by 3D printing technology. (c–e) The template was installed on the ilium intraoperatively. (f) The wedge-shaped osteotomy block.
Figure 3Preoperative and postoperative imaging data of a 25-month-old girl with DDH. (a) Anteroposterior radiograph of the pelvic before surgery. (b) Anteroposterior radiograph of the pelvic after surgery.
Comparison of operation data and functional outcomes between two groups.
| Conventional group ( | Navigation template group ( |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Corrective AI degrees (°) | 24.6 ± 4.1 | 21.4 ± 2.2 | 0.0083 |
| Radiation exposure (times) | 6.9 ± 2.6 | 4.8 ± 1.9 | <0.0001 |
| Operation time (min) | 44.1 ± 3.2 | 25.6 ± 2.1 | <0.0001 |
| Severin radiological results, | 0.0949 | ||
| Excellent | 7 (43.8) | 13 (81.25) | |
| Good | 6 (37.5) | 1 (6.25) | |
| Fair | 2 (12.5) | 2 (12.5) | |
| Poor | 1 (6.2) | 0 | |
| McKay standard, | 0.0293 | ||
| Excellent | 6 (37.5) | 14 (87.5) | |
| Good | 4 (25.0) | 1 (6.25) | |
| Fair | 3 (18.75) | 1 (6.25) | |
| Poor | 3 (18.75) | 0 |