MedElevator
Войти в исследования The Journal of hand surgery · 2017
Conventional Versus Computer-Assisted Corrective Osteotomy of the Forearm: a Retrospective Analysis of 56 Consecutive Cases.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Bauer David Ephraim, Zimmermann Stefan, Aichmair Alexander, Hingsammer Andreas, Schweizer Andreas, Nagy Ladislav, Fürnstahl Philipp
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Accuracy and feasibility of corrective osteotomies using 3-dimensional planning tools and patient-specific instrumentation has been reported by multiple authors with promising results. However, studies describing clinical outcomes following these procedures are rare. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare the results of computer-assisted corrective osteotomies of the diaphyseal and distal radius with a conventional non-computer-assisted technique regarding duration of surgery, consolidation of the osteotomy, and complications. Also, subjective and objective clinical outcome parameters were assessed.
METHODS: We retrospectively compared the results of 31 patients who underwent a corrective osteotomy performed conventionally with 25 patients treated with a computer-assisted method (CA) using patient-specific instrumentation. Baseline data were similar among both groups. The duration of surgery, bony consolidation, complications, gain in range of motion, and subjective outcome were recorded.
RESULTS: The mean operating time was significantly shorter in the CA group compared with the conventional group. After 12 weeks, significantly more osteotomies were considered healed in the CA group compared with the conventional group. Two patients in the CA group required revision surgery to treat nonunion of the osteotomy. Otherwise clinical results were similar among both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate that the computer-assisted method facilitates shorter operation times while providing similar clinical results.
TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.
METHODS: We retrospectively compared the results of 31 patients who underwent a corrective osteotomy performed conventionally with 25 patients treated with a computer-assisted method (CA) using patient-specific instrumentation. Baseline data were similar among both groups. The duration of surgery, bony consolidation, complications, gain in range of motion, and subjective outcome were recorded.
RESULTS: The mean operating time was significantly shorter in the CA group compared with the conventional group. After 12 weeks, significantly more osteotomies were considered healed in the CA group compared with the conventional group. Two patients in the CA group required revision surgery to treat nonunion of the osteotomy. Otherwise clinical results were similar among both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate that the computer-assisted method facilitates shorter operation times while providing similar clinical results.
TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.