Cargando…

3D pelvimetry and biometric measurements: a surgical perspective for colorectal resections

PURPOSE: Male sex, high BMI, narrow pelvis, and bulky mesorectum were acknowledged as clinical variables correlated with a difficult pelvic dissection in colorectal surgery. This paper aimed at comparing pelvic biometric measurements in female and male patients and at providing a perspective on how...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lorenzon, Laura, Bini, Fabiano, Landolfi, Federica, Quinzi, Serena, Balducci, Genoveffa, Marinozzi, Franco, Biondi, Alberto, Persiani, Roberto, D’Ugo, Domenico, Tirelli, Flavio, Iannicelli, Elsa
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8026460/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33230658
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00384-020-03802-9
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: Male sex, high BMI, narrow pelvis, and bulky mesorectum were acknowledged as clinical variables correlated with a difficult pelvic dissection in colorectal surgery. This paper aimed at comparing pelvic biometric measurements in female and male patients and at providing a perspective on how pelvimetry segmentation may help in visualizing mesorectal distribution. METHODS: A 3D software was used for segmentation of DICOM data of consecutive patients aged 60 years, who underwent elective abdominal CT scan. The following measurements were estimated: pelvic inlet, outlet, and depth; pubic tubercle height; distances from the promontory to the coccyx and to S3/S4; distance from S3/S4 to coccyx’s tip; ischial spines distance; pelvic tilt; offset angle; pelvic inlet angle; angle between the inlet/sacral promontory/coccyx; angle between the promontory/coccyx/pelvic outlet; S3 angle; and pelvic inlet to pelvic depth ratio. The measurements were compared in males and females using statistical analyses. RESULTS: Two-hundred patients (M/F 1:1) were analyzed. Out of 21 pelvimetry measurements, 19 of them documented a significant mean difference between groups. Specifically, female patients had a significantly wider pelvic inlet and outlet but a shorter pelvic depth, and promontory/sacral/coccyx distances, resulting in an augmented inlet/depth ratio when comparing with males (p < 0.0001). The sole exceptions were the straight conjugate (p = 0.06) and S3 angle (p = 0.17). 3D segmentation provided a perspective of the mesorectum distribution according to the pelvic shape. CONCLUSION: Significant differences in the structure of pelvis exist in males and females. Surgeons must be aware of the pelvic shape when approaching the rectum. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00384-020-03802-9.