Application of Finite Element Analysis Combined With Virtual Computer in Preoperative Planning of Distal Femoral Fracture

Clinical validation of artificial intelligence-based preoperative virtual reduction for Neer 3- or 4-part proximal humerus fractures

BACKGROUND

If reduction images of fractures can be provided in advance with artificial-intelligence (AI)-based technology, it can assist with preoperative surgical planning. Recently, we developed the AI-based preoperative virtual reduction model for orthopedic trauma, which can provide an automatic segmentation and reduction of fractured fragments. The purpose of this study was to validate a quality of reduction model of Neer 3- or 4-part proximal humerus fractures established by AI-based technology.

METHODS

To develop the AI-based preoperative virtual reduction model, deep learning performed the segmentation of fracture fragments, and a Monte Carlo simulation completed the virtual reduction to determine the best model. A total of 20 pre/postoperative three-dimensional computed tomography (CT) scans of proximal humerus fracture were prepared. The preoperative CT scans were employed as the input of AI-based automated reduction (AI-R) to deduce the reduction models of fracture fragments, meanwhile, the manual reduction (MR) was conducted using the same CT images. Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and intersection over union (IoU) between the reduction model from the AI-R/MR and postoperative CT scans were evaluated. Working times were compared between the two groups. Clinical validity agreement (CVA) and reduction quality score (RQS) were investigated for clinical validation outcomes by 20 orthopedic surgeons.

RESULTS

The mean DSC and IoU were better when using AI-R that when using MR (0.78 ± 0.13 vs. 0.69 ± 0.16, p < 0.001 and 0.65 ± 0.16 vs. 0.55 ± 0.18, p < 0.001, respectively). The working time of AI-R was, on average, 1.41% of that of MR. The mean CVA of all cases was 81%±14.7% (AI-R, 82.25%±14.27%; MR, 76.75%±14.17%, p = 0.06). The mean RQS was significantly higher when AI-R compared with MR was used (91.47 ± 1.12 vs. 89.30 ± 1.62, p = 0.045).

CONCLUSION

The AI-based preoperative virtual reduction model showed good performance in the reduction model in proximal humerus fractures with faster working times. Beyond diagnosis, classification, and outcome prediction, the AI-based technology can change the paradigm of preoperative surgical planning in orthopedic surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Computer-assisted preoperative planning of bone fracture fixation surgery: A state-of-the-art review

Background: Bone fracture fixation surgery is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures in the orthopedic field. However, fracture healing complications occur frequently, and the choice of the most optimal surgical approach often remains challenging. In the last years, computational tools have been developed with the aim to assist preoperative planning procedures of bone fracture fixation surgery. Objectives: The aims of this review are 1) to provide a comprehensive overview of the state-of-the-art in computer-assisted preoperative planning of bone fracture fixation surgery, 2) to assess the clinical feasibility of the existing virtual planning approaches, and 3) to assess their clinical efficacy in terms of clinical outcomes as compared to conventional planning methods. Methods: A literature search was performed in the MEDLINE-PubMed, Ovid-EMBASE, Ovid-EMCARE, Web of Science, and Cochrane libraries to identify articles reporting on the clinical use of computer-assisted preoperative planning of bone fracture fixation. Results: 79 articles were included to provide an overview of the state-of-the art in virtual planning. While patient-specific geometrical model construction, virtual bone fracture reduction, and virtual fixation planning are routinely applied in virtual planning, biomechanical analysis is rarely included in the planning framework. 21 of the included studies were used to assess the feasibility and efficacy of computer-assisted planning methods. The reported total mean planning duration ranged from 22 to 258 min in different studies. Computer-assisted planning resulted in reduced operation time (Standardized Mean Difference (SMD): -2.19; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): -2.87, -1.50), less blood loss (SMD: -1.99; 95% CI: -2.75, -1.24), decreased frequency of fluoroscopy (SMD: -2.18; 95% CI: -2.74, -1.61), shortened fracture healing times (SMD: -0.51; 95% CI: -0.97, -0.05) and less postoperative complications (Risk Ratio (RR): 0.64, 95% CI: 0.46, 0.90). No significant differences were found in hospitalization duration. Some studies reported improvements in reduction quality and functional outcomes but these results were not pooled for meta-analysis, since the reported outcome measures were too heterogeneous. Conclusion: Current computer-assisted planning approaches are feasible to be used in clinical practice and have been shown to improve clinical outcomes. Including biomechanical analysis into the framework has the potential to further improve clinical outcome.