Intraoperative CT in the assessment of posterior wall acetabular fracture stability

Assessment of Force Applied During Examination Under Anesthesia Used to Determine Stability in Posterior Wall Acetabular Fractures

OBJECTIVES

Determination of hip instability associated with posterior wall acetabular fractures may be difficult. Thus, dynamic stress examination under anesthesia (EUA) was developed as a tool for guiding treatment. EUA uses positioning of the hip and application of force across the hip to detect instability. While aspects of the EUA technique seems consistently described in the literature and practiced by surgeons, some components are ill-defined. The goal of this study was to assess standardization of applied force during EUA among experienced acetabular surgeons.

METHODS

Fellowship-trained orthopaedic trauma surgeons with experience in acetabular fracture treatment performed EUA for posterior wall instability on an intact, fresh human cadaver. All surgeons used a similar method, and each expert performed EUA multiple times separated by a brief hiatus. The maximum force applied along the femur's vector in Newtons (N) was measured using a hand-held digital dynamometer.

RESULTS

The EUAs of 19 surgeons were evaluated. Five surgeons had been practicing for <5 years, six for 6 to 10 years, five for 11 to 20 years, and three for >20 years. The mean force applied during EUA was 173N, with a notable variability between surgeons (range, 77-368N). Notable variability was also observed between sequential measures of individual surgeons with six surgeons (31.6%) having a >50N range on repeat trials.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to report force applied during an EUA to assess for posterior wall acetabular fracture stability. Notable variability was observed among surgeons performing the examination and in repeated examinations by the same surgeon, suggesting that results of EUA may be surgeon-dependent. Further study is needed to determine what optimal applied force should be used to assess hip stability after a posterior wall acetabular fracture.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level V. An assessment of a diagnostic tool.

Outcome After Open Reduction Internal Fixation of Acetabular Fractures in the Elderly

OBJECTIVES

(1) Assess outcomes of acetabular open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) in the elderly, (2) investigate factors influencing outcome, and (3) compare outcomes after low-energy and high-energy mechanisms of injury.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

SETTING

Level 1 trauma center.

PATIENTS

Seventy-eight patients older than 60 years (age: 70.1 ± 7.4; 73.1% males).

INTERVENTION

ORIF for acetabular fractures.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Complications, reoperation rates, Oxford Hip Score (OHS), and joint preservation and development of symptomatic osteoarthritis. Cases with osteoarthritis, OHS < 34, and those who required subsequent total hip arthroplasty were considered as poor outcome.

RESULTS

At a mean follow-up of 4.3 ± 3.7 years, 11 cases post-ORIF required a total hip arthroplasty. The 7-year joint survival post-ORIF was 80.7 ± 5.7%. Considering poor outcome as failure, the 7-year joint survival was 67.0 ± 8.9%. The grade of reduction was the most significant factor associated with outcome post-ORIF. Female sex (P = 0.03), pre-existing osteoporosis (P = 0.03), low-energy trauma (P = 0.04), and Matta grade (P = 0.002) were associated with poor outcome. Patients with associated both-column fractures were more likely to have nonanatomic reduction (P = 0.008). After low-energy trauma, joint survivorship was 36.6 ± 13.5% at 7 years compared with 75.4 ± 7.4% in the high-energy group when considering poor outcome as an end point (log rank P = 0.006). The cohort's mean OHS was 37.9 ± 9.3 (17-48).

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend ORIF whenever an anatomic reduction is feasible. However, achievement and maintenance of anatomic reduction are a challenge in the elderly, specifically in those with low-energy fractures involving both columns, prompting consideration for alternative management strategies.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Does the use of intraoperative CT scan improve outcomes in Orthopaedic surgery? A systematic review and meta-analysis of 871 cases

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative imaging is frequently made use of in Orthopaedic surgery. Historically, conventional 2-dimensional fluoroscopy has been extensively used for this purpose. However, 2D imaging falls short when it is required to visualise complex anatomical regions such as pelvis, spine, foot and ankle etc. Intraoperative 3D imaging was introduced to counter these limitations, and is increasingly being employed in various sub-specialities of Orthopaedic Surgery.

OBJECTIVES

This review aims to outline the clinical and radiological outcomes of surgeries done under the guidance of intraoperative 3D imaging and compare them to those done under conventional 2D fluoroscopy.

METHODS

Three electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Scopus) were searched for relevant studies that directly compared intraoperative 3D imaging with conventional fluoroscopy. Case series on intraoperative 3D imaging were also included for qualitative synthesis. The outcomes evaluated included accuracy of implant placement, mean surgical duration and rate of revision surgery due to faulty implants.

RESULTS

A total of 31 studies from sub-specialities of spine surgery, pelvi-acetabular surgery, foot and ankle surgery and trauma surgery, having data on a total of 658 patients were analysed. The study groups which had access to intraoperative 3D imaging was found to have significantly increased accuracy of implant positioning (Odds Ratio 0.35 [0.20, 0.62], p = 0.0002) without statistically significant difference in mean surgical time (p = 0.57). Analysis of the studies that included clinical follow up showed that the use of intraoperative 3D imaging led to a significant decrease in the need for revision surgeries due to faulty implant placement.

CONCLUSION

There is sufficient evidence that the application of intraoperative 3D imaging leads to precise implant positioning and improves the radiological outcome. Further research in the form of prospective studies with long term follow up is required to determine whether this superior radiological outcome translates to better clinical results in the long run.

A Review on Advances in Intra-operative Imaging for Surgery and Therapy: Imagining the Operating Room of the Future

With the advent of Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS), intra-operative imaging has become crucial for surgery and therapy guidance, allowing to partially compensate for the lack of information typical of MIS. This paper reviews the advancements in both classical (i.e. ultrasounds, X-ray, optical coherence tomography and magnetic resonance imaging) and more recent (i.e. multispectral, photoacoustic and Raman imaging) intra-operative imaging modalities. Each imaging modality was analyzed, focusing on benefits and disadvantages in terms of compatibility with the operating room, costs, acquisition time and image characteristics. Tables are included to summarize this information. New generation of hybrid surgical room and algorithms for real time/in room image processing were also investigated. Each imaging modality has its own (site- and procedure-specific) peculiarities in terms of spatial and temporal resolution, field of view and contrasted tissues. Besides the benefits that each technique offers for guidance, considerations about operators and patient risk, costs, and extra time required for surgical procedures have to be considered. The current trend is to equip surgical rooms with multimodal imaging systems, so as to integrate multiple information for real-time data extraction and computer-assisted processing. The future of surgery is to enhance surgeons eye to minimize intra- and after-surgery adverse events and provide surgeons with all possible support to objectify and optimize the care-delivery process.

New Imaging, Diagnostic, and Assessment Techniques in Orthopedic Trauma

This article examines new imaging, diagnostic, and assessment techniques that may affect the care of patients with orthopedic trauma and/or infection. Three-dimensional imaging has assisted in fracture assessment preoperatively, whereas improvement in C-arm technology has allowed real-time evaluation of implant placement and periarticular reduction before leaving the operating room. Advances in imaging techniques have allowed earlier and more accurate diagnosis of nonunion and infection. Innovations in bacteriologic testing have improved the sensitivity and specificity of perioperative and peri-implant infections. It is critical that surgeons remain up to date on the options available for optimal patient care.