Comparison of software-assisted and freehand methods of rotational assessment for diaphyseal femur fractures.
basic_science · Level V
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 39708202.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1007/s00590-024-04121-3 and PMC identifier 11663147.
- Licence recorded as CC BY.
- The licence permits redistribution, so the abstract is shown in full and the full text is available from the publisher.
Abstract
Accurate rotational reduction following femoral shaft fracture fixation is absent in up to 28% of cases yet is critical for lower extremity biomechanics. The objective of this cadaveric study was to compare the results of freehand methods of rotational reduction with software-assisted rotational reduction. Four fellowship-trained orthopedic trauma surgeons attempted rotational correction in a cadaveric model with fluoroscopic assistance using (1) their method of choice (MoC) and (2) software assistance (SA). After correction, deviation from baseline rotation was calculated. The mean difference between the two methods (MoC-SA) was 1.1 which was not significant when comparing all raters and between raters individually. SA had significantly less variability compared to MoC. The rate of clinically relevant rotational deformity (> 15°) was 28% using MoC and 11% using SA. Rotational assessment of diaphyseal femur fractures in this cadaveric model was not significantly different when compared between method of choice and software augmentation.
Medical subject headings
- Femoral Fractures
- Software
- Diaphyses
- Cadaver
Anatomy
- femur