The Journal of hand surgery · 2019
Topographical Analysis of the Hamate for Proximal Pole Scaphoid Nonunion Reconstruction.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kakar Sanjeev, Greene Ryan M, Elhassan Bassem T, Holmes David R
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To quantify the similarity of the surface topography of the proximal hamate and proximal pole of the scaphoid for nonunion reconstruction.
METHODS: Using previously acquired computed tomographic scans of the wrist of 10 patients, the 2 bones were segmented and subsequently aligned using both a manual and automated technique. Surface error between corresponding articular surfaces was computed to determine the similarity of the shape of the 2 bones.
RESULTS: The median distance between the 2 articulating surfaces for each patient was 1 mm or less for all cases. Maximum distance varied from 2.7 to 9.7 mm. The automated method improved alignment such that the maximum distance was 4.1 mm. Visual review of the alignment revealed that the maximum error occurred on or around the margin of the articulating surfaces.
CONCLUSIONS: In most cases, the proximal hamate appears to be a suitable donor match to reconstruct proximal pole scaphoid nonunions.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study serves as a guide to practitioners when considering the suitability of the proximal hamate autograft for unsalvageable proximal pole scaphoid nonunions.
METHODS: Using previously acquired computed tomographic scans of the wrist of 10 patients, the 2 bones were segmented and subsequently aligned using both a manual and automated technique. Surface error between corresponding articular surfaces was computed to determine the similarity of the shape of the 2 bones.
RESULTS: The median distance between the 2 articulating surfaces for each patient was 1 mm or less for all cases. Maximum distance varied from 2.7 to 9.7 mm. The automated method improved alignment such that the maximum distance was 4.1 mm. Visual review of the alignment revealed that the maximum error occurred on or around the margin of the articulating surfaces.
CONCLUSIONS: In most cases, the proximal hamate appears to be a suitable donor match to reconstruct proximal pole scaphoid nonunions.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study serves as a guide to practitioners when considering the suitability of the proximal hamate autograft for unsalvageable proximal pole scaphoid nonunions.