2D-fluoroscopic based navigation for Gamma 3 nail insertion versus conventional procedure- a feasibility study

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders

F Gras¹  G O Hofmann¹  I Marintschev¹  A Wilharm¹ 

[1] Department of Trauma-, Hand- and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital Jena, Erlanger Allee 101, Jena 07747, Germany

关键词: Radiation exposure;    Trochanteric fracture;    Cephalomedullary nail;    Proximal femoral nailing;    Fluoroscopic navigation;    Computer assisted surgery;    Geriatric traumatology;    Gamma nail;    Navigation;    Femoral fracture;   

Others  :  1133937
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2474-14-74

 received in 2012-06-18, accepted in 2013-02-20,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Intramedullary nailing is a standard surgical procedure for fixation of proximal femoral fractures, but is associated with considerable radiation exposure for controlling the implant placement, due to the percutaneous insertion technique.

The aim of this study was the evaluation of potential benefits of 2D-fluoroscopic based navigation focused on the reduction of radiation exposure, a decrease of procedure time, as well as an increase of accuracy for Gamma3 nail insertions.

Methods

Twenty randomized Gamma3 nail insertions were performed in non-fractured synthetic femora according to the manufactures operation guidelines (group I) or with use of a 2D-fluoroscopic based navigation system (group II). Time of different steps of the procedure and the radiation exposure were measured, as well as the accuracy evaluated in postoperative CT scans.

Results and discussion

All Gamma3 nails were placed without any technical problems. Independent of the used procedure, the overall operating time (group I: 584 ± 99.2 sec; group II: 662 ± 64.9 sec; p=0.06) and accuracy of the final nail-positions were equivalent, but the radiation exposure was significantly reduced (92% reduction in fluoroscopic images and 91% reduction in fluoroscopic time, p< 0.01), using the 2D fluoroscopic based navigation procedure.

Conclusions

2D-fluoroscopic based navigation for Gamma3 nail insertion facilitates a relevant reduction of radiation exposure with equivalent accuracy of the final implant position and no prolonged operating time. This promising procedure modification is independent of different cephalomedullary implant manufacturers and specific implant designs, but needs to be evaluated in further clinical settings.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Wilharm et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Bundesauswertung zum Verfahrensjahr: Hüftgelenksnahe Frakturen. Gottingen: AQUA – Institut für angewandte Qualitätsförderung und Forschung im Gesundheitswesen GmbH 2010; 2009.
• [2]Berrington de Gonzalez A, Darby S: Risk of cancer from diagnostic X-rays: estimates for the UK and 14 other countries. Lancet 2004, 363(9406):345-351.
• [3]Chong KW, Wong MK, Rikhraj IS, Howe TS: The use of computer navigation in performing minimally invasive surgery for intertrochanteric hip fractures–The experience in Singapore. Injury 2006, 37(8):755-762.
• [4]Hafez MA, Smith RM, Matthews SJ, Kalap G, Sherman KP: Radiation exposure to the hands of orthopaedic surgeons: are we underestimating the risk? Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2005, 125(5):330-335.
• [5]Mehlman CT, DiPasquale TG: Radiation exposure to the orthopaedic surgical team during fluoroscopy: "how far away is far enough?". J Orthop Trauma 1997, 11(6):392-398.
• [6]Baumgaertner MR, Curtin SL, Lindskog DM, Keggi JM: The value of the tip-apex distance in predicting failure of fixation of peritrochanteric fractures of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1995, 77(7):1058-1064.
• [7]Gras F, Marintschev I, Klos K, Muckley T, Hofmann GO, Kahler DM: Screw placement for acetabular fractures: which navigation modality (2-dimensional vs. 3-dimensional) should be used? An experimental study. J Orthop Trauma 2012, 26(8):466-473.
• [8]Gras F, Marintschev I, Wilharm A, Lindner R, Klos K, Muckley T, Hofmann GO: Sustentaculum tali screw placement for calcaneus fractures–different navigation procedures compared to the conventional technique. Z Orthop Unfall 2010, 148(3):309-318.
• [9]Muller MC, Belei P, de la Fuente M, Strake M, Kabir K, Weber O, Burger C, Radermacher K, Wirtz DC: Evaluation of a 2D fluoroscopy-based navigation system for insertion of femoral neck screws: An experimental study. Unfallchirurg 2012, 115(9):802-810. Sep
• [10]Muller MC, Belei P, de la Fuente M, Strake M, Weber O, Burger C, Radermacher K, Wirtz DC: Evaluation of a 2D Fluoroscopy-Based Navigation System for Insertion of the Dynamic Hip Screw (DHS): an Experimental Study. Rofo 2011, 183(6):536-542.
• [11]Miller ME, Davis ML, MacClean CR, Davis JG, Smith BL, Humphries JR: Radiation exposure and associated risks to operating-room personnel during use of fluoroscopic guidance for selected orthopaedic surgical procedures. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1983, 65(1):1-4.
• [12]Kwong LM, Johanson PH, Zinar DM, Lenihan MR, Herman MW: Shielding of the patient's gonads during intramedullary interlocking femoral nailing. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1990, 72(10):1523-1526.
• [13]Beldame J, Boisrenoult P, Beaufils P: Pin track induced fractures around computer-assisted TKA. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2010, 96(3):249-255. May
• [14]Kendoff D, Hufner T, Citak M, Maier C, Wesemeier F, Pearle A, Krettek C: A new parallel drill guide for navigating femoral neck screw placement. Development and evaluation. Unfallchirurg 2006, 109(10):875-880.
• [15]Hamelinck HK, Haagmans M, Snoeren MM, Biert J, van Vugt AB, Frolke JP: Safety of computer-assisted surgery for cannulated hip screws. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2007, 455:241-245.
• [16]Liebergall M, Ben-David D, Weil Y, Peyser A, Mosheiff R: Computerized navigation for the internal fixation of femoral neck fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006, 88(8):1748-1754.
• [17]Beckmann J, Tingart M, Perlick L, Luring C, Grifka J, Anders S: Navigated drilling for femoral head necrosis. Experimental and clinical results. Orthopade 2007, 36(5):458-465.