A novel method of light projection and modular jigs to improve accuracy in bone sarcoma resection

Does Freehand, Patient-specific Instrumentation or Surgical Navigation Perform Better for Allograft Reconstruction After Tumor Resection? A Preclinical Synthetic Bone Study

BACKGROUND

Joint-sparing resection of periarticular bone tumors can be challenging because of complex geometry. Successful reconstruction of periarticular bone defects after tumor resection is often performed with structural allografts to allow for joint preservation. However, achieving a size-matched allograft to fill the defect can be challenging because allograft sizes vary, they do not always match a patient's anatomy, and cutting the allograft to perfectly fit the defect is demanding.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Is there a difference in mental workload among the freehand, patient-specific instrumentation, and surgical navigation approaches? (2) Is there a difference in conformance (quantitative measure of deviation from the ideal bone graft), elapsed time during reconstruction, and qualitative assessment of goodness-of-fit of the allograft reconstruction among the approaches?

METHODS

Seven surgeons used three modalities in the same order (freehand, patient-specific instrumentation, and surgical navigation) to fashion synthetic bone to reconstruct a standardized bone defect. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) mental task load index questionnaires and procedure time were captured. Cone-beam CT images of the shaped allografts were used to measure conformance (quantitative measure of deviation from the ideal bone graft) to a computer-generated ideal bone graft model. Six additional (senior) surgeons blinded to modality scored the quality of fit of the allografts into the standardized tumor defect using a 10-point Likert scale. We measured conformance using the root-mean-square metric in mm and used ANOVA for multipaired comparisons (p < 0.05 was significant).

RESULTS

There was no difference in mental NASA total task load scores among the freehand, patient-specific instrumentation, and surgical navigation techniques. We found no difference in conformance root-mean-square values (mean ± SD) between surgical navigation (2 ± 0 mm; mean values have been rounded to whole numbers) and patient-specific instrumentation (2 ± 1 mm), but both showed a small improvement compared with the freehand approach (3 ± 1 mm). For freehand versus surgical navigation, the mean difference was 1 mm (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.5 to 1.1; p = 0.01). For freehand versus patient-specific instrumentation, the mean difference was 1 mm (95% CI -0.1 to 0.9; p = 0.02). For patient-specific instrumentation versus surgical navigation, the mean difference was 0 mm (95% CI -0.5 to 0.2; p = 0.82). In evaluating the goodness of fit of the shaped grafts, we found no clinically important difference between surgical navigation (median [IQR] 7 [6 to 8]) and patient-specific instrumentation (median 6 [5 to 7.8]), although both techniques had higher scores than the freehand technique did (median 3 [2 to 4]). For freehand versus surgical navigation, the difference of medians was 4 (p < 0.001). For freehand versus patient-specific instrumentation, the difference of medians was 3 (p < 0.001). For patient-specific instrumentation versus surgical navigation, the difference of medians was 1 (p = 0.03). The mean ± procedural times for freehand was 16 ± 10 minutes, patient-specific instrumentation was 14 ± 9 minutes, and surgical navigation techniques was 24 ± 8 minutes. We found no differences in procedures times across three shaping modalities (freehand versus patient-specific instrumentation: mean difference 2 minutes [95% CI 0 to 7]; p = 0.92; freehand versus surgical navigation: mean difference 8 minutes [95% CI 0 to 20]; p = 0.23; patient-specific instrumentation versus surgical navigation: mean difference 10 minutes [95% CI 1 to 19]; p = 0.12).

CONCLUSION

Based on surgical simulation to reconstruct a standardized periarticular bone defect after tumor resection, we found a possible small advantage to surgical navigation over patient-specific instrumentation based on qualitative fit, but both techniques provided slightly better conformance of the shaped graft for fit into the standardized post-tumor resection bone defect than the freehand technique did. To determine whether these differences are clinically meaningful requires further study. The surgical navigation system presented here is a product of laboratory research development, and although not ready to be widely deployed for clinical practice, it is currently being used in a research operating room setting for patient care. This new technology is associated with a learning curve, capital costs, and potential risk. The reported preliminary results are based on a preclinical synthetic bone tumor study, which is not as realistic as actual surgical scenarios.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Surgical navigation systems are an emerging technology in orthopaedic and reconstruction surgery, and understanding their capabilities and limitations is paramount for clinical practice. Given our preliminary findings in a small cohort study with one scenario of standardized synthetic periarticular bone tumor defects, future investigations should include different surgical scenarios using allograft and cadaveric specimens in a more realistic surgical setting.

Fluoroscopically calibrated 3D-printed patient-specific instruments improve the accuracy of osteotomy during bone tumor resection adjacent to joints

BACKGROUND

Inadequate surface matching, variation in the guide design, and soft tissue on the skeletal surface may make it difficult to accurately place the 3D-printed patient-specific instrument (PSI) exactly to the designated site, leading to decreased accuracy, or even errors. Consequently, we developed a novel 3D-printed PSI with fluoroscopy-guided positioning markers to enhance the accuracy of osteotomies in joint-preserving surgery. The current study was to compare whether the fluoroscopically calibrated PSI (FCPSI) can achieve better accuracy compared with freehand resection and conventional PSI (CPSI) resection.

METHODS

Simulated joint-preserving surgery was conducted using nine synthetic left knee bone models. Osteotomies adjacent to the knee joint were designed to evaluate the accuracy at the epiphysis side. The experiment was divided into three groups: free-hand, conventional PSI (CPSI), and fluoroscopically Calibrated PSI (FCPSI). Post-resection CT scans were quantitatively analyzed. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used.

RESULT

FCPSI improved the resection accuracy significantly. The mean location accuracy is 2.66 mm for FCPSI compared to 6.36 mm (P < 0.001) for freehand resection and 4.58 mm (P = 0.012) for CPSI. The mean average distance is 1.27 mm compared to 2.99 mm (p < 0.001) and 2.11 mm (p = 0.049). The mean absolute angle is 2.16° compared to 8.50° (p < 0.001) and 5.54° (p = 0.021). The mean depth angle is 1.41° compared to 8.10° (p < 0.001) and 5.32° (p = 0.012). However, there were no significant differences in the front angle compared to the freehand resection group (P = 0.055) and CPSI (P = 0.599) group. The location accuracy observed with FCPSI was maintained at 4 mm, while CPSI and freehand resection exhibited a maximum deviation of 8 mm.

CONCLUSION

The fluoroscopically calibrated 3D-printed patient-specific instruments improve the accuracy of osteotomy during bone tumor resection adjacent to joint joints compared to conventional PSI and freehand resection. In conclusion, this novel 3D-printed PSI offers significant accuracy improvement in joint preserving surgery with a minimal increase in time and design costs.

A Novel 3D Light Assisted Drawing (3D-LAD) Method to Aid Intraoperative Reproduction of Osteotomy Lines Surrounding a Bone Tumor During Wide Resection: An Experimental Study

Introduction

Computer navigation and customized 3D-printed jigs improve accuracy during bone tumor resection, but such technologies can be bulky, costly, and require intraoperative radiation, or long lead time to be ready in OR.

Methods

We developed a method utilizing a compact, inexpensive, non-X-ray based 3D surface light scanner to provide a visual aid that helps surgeons accurately draw osteotomy lines on the surface of exposed bone to reproduce a well-defined preoperative bone resection plan. We tested the accuracy of the method on 18 sawbones using a distal femur hemimetaphyseal resection model and compared it with a traditional, freehand method.

Results

The method significantly reduces the positional error from 2.53 (±1.13) mm to 1.04 (±0.43) mm (p<0.001), and angular error of the front angle from 2.10° (±0.83°) to 0.80° (±0.66°) (p=0.001). The method also reduces the mean maximum deviation of the bone resection, with respect to the preoperative path, from 3.75mm to 2.69mm (p=0.003). However, no increased accuracy was observed at the back side of the bone surface where this method would not be expected to provide information.

Discussion

In summary, we developed a novel 3D-LAD navigation technology. From the experimental study, we demonstrated that the method can improve the ability of surgeons to accurately draw the preoperative osteotomy lines and perform resection of a primary bone sarcoma, with comparison to traditional methods, using 18 sawbones.