Cargando…
Comparison between Areas of Bone Visualization Using Radiolucent Hybrid Fixator Frames and Graphically Simulated Metallic Frames: An Ex Vivo Study
The objective of this study is to evaluate the difference between the amount of bone visible with the superimposition of a radiolucent hybrid external fixator and a graphically simulated metallic frame. Eighteen frames were applied to eighteen bone specimens. The fracture area (FA), the radiolucent...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8951392/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35324848 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vetsci9030120 |
_version_ | 1784675374744993792 |
---|---|
author | Bonardi, Andrea Rovesti, Gian Luca Martini, Filippo Maria Dondi, Francesco Benedini, Davide Barbieri, Fabio |
author_facet | Bonardi, Andrea Rovesti, Gian Luca Martini, Filippo Maria Dondi, Francesco Benedini, Davide Barbieri, Fabio |
author_sort | Bonardi, Andrea |
collection | PubMed |
description | The objective of this study is to evaluate the difference between the amount of bone visible with the superimposition of a radiolucent hybrid external fixator and a graphically simulated metallic frame. Eighteen frames were applied to eighteen bone specimens. The fracture area (FA), the radiolucent area (RLA) and the radiopaque area (ROA) inside the FA were calculated for each construct on both postoperative views. The ratio between the RLA and FA and between the ROA and FA was used to evaluate the amount of bone visible in the FA with a radiolucent and a radiopaque fixator, respectively. Finally, the areas of RLA and ROA were compared using the Wilcoxon test and Friedman test to evaluate the effect of the radiolucent material on the amount of bone visible. Differences were considered significant if p < 0.5. In every specimen p was <0.5. The amount of bone visible was significantly higher with the radiolucent frame compared to the radiopaque frame. Based on the results of this study, the use of radiolucent materials can be a valuable option for external fixation, in order to decrease the radiographic interference of the frame, allowing better assessment of fracture reduction and bone healing on postoperative radiographs. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8951392 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-89513922022-03-26 Comparison between Areas of Bone Visualization Using Radiolucent Hybrid Fixator Frames and Graphically Simulated Metallic Frames: An Ex Vivo Study Bonardi, Andrea Rovesti, Gian Luca Martini, Filippo Maria Dondi, Francesco Benedini, Davide Barbieri, Fabio Vet Sci Article The objective of this study is to evaluate the difference between the amount of bone visible with the superimposition of a radiolucent hybrid external fixator and a graphically simulated metallic frame. Eighteen frames were applied to eighteen bone specimens. The fracture area (FA), the radiolucent area (RLA) and the radiopaque area (ROA) inside the FA were calculated for each construct on both postoperative views. The ratio between the RLA and FA and between the ROA and FA was used to evaluate the amount of bone visible in the FA with a radiolucent and a radiopaque fixator, respectively. Finally, the areas of RLA and ROA were compared using the Wilcoxon test and Friedman test to evaluate the effect of the radiolucent material on the amount of bone visible. Differences were considered significant if p < 0.5. In every specimen p was <0.5. The amount of bone visible was significantly higher with the radiolucent frame compared to the radiopaque frame. Based on the results of this study, the use of radiolucent materials can be a valuable option for external fixation, in order to decrease the radiographic interference of the frame, allowing better assessment of fracture reduction and bone healing on postoperative radiographs. MDPI 2022-03-07 /pmc/articles/PMC8951392/ /pubmed/35324848 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vetsci9030120 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Bonardi, Andrea Rovesti, Gian Luca Martini, Filippo Maria Dondi, Francesco Benedini, Davide Barbieri, Fabio Comparison between Areas of Bone Visualization Using Radiolucent Hybrid Fixator Frames and Graphically Simulated Metallic Frames: An Ex Vivo Study |
title | Comparison between Areas of Bone Visualization Using Radiolucent Hybrid Fixator Frames and Graphically Simulated Metallic Frames: An Ex Vivo Study |
title_full | Comparison between Areas of Bone Visualization Using Radiolucent Hybrid Fixator Frames and Graphically Simulated Metallic Frames: An Ex Vivo Study |
title_fullStr | Comparison between Areas of Bone Visualization Using Radiolucent Hybrid Fixator Frames and Graphically Simulated Metallic Frames: An Ex Vivo Study |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison between Areas of Bone Visualization Using Radiolucent Hybrid Fixator Frames and Graphically Simulated Metallic Frames: An Ex Vivo Study |
title_short | Comparison between Areas of Bone Visualization Using Radiolucent Hybrid Fixator Frames and Graphically Simulated Metallic Frames: An Ex Vivo Study |
title_sort | comparison between areas of bone visualization using radiolucent hybrid fixator frames and graphically simulated metallic frames: an ex vivo study |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8951392/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35324848 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vetsci9030120 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bonardiandrea comparisonbetweenareasofbonevisualizationusingradiolucenthybridfixatorframesandgraphicallysimulatedmetallicframesanexvivostudy AT rovestigianluca comparisonbetweenareasofbonevisualizationusingradiolucenthybridfixatorframesandgraphicallysimulatedmetallicframesanexvivostudy AT martinifilippomaria comparisonbetweenareasofbonevisualizationusingradiolucenthybridfixatorframesandgraphicallysimulatedmetallicframesanexvivostudy AT dondifrancesco comparisonbetweenareasofbonevisualizationusingradiolucenthybridfixatorframesandgraphicallysimulatedmetallicframesanexvivostudy AT benedinidavide comparisonbetweenareasofbonevisualizationusingradiolucenthybridfixatorframesandgraphicallysimulatedmetallicframesanexvivostudy AT barbierifabio comparisonbetweenareasofbonevisualizationusingradiolucenthybridfixatorframesandgraphicallysimulatedmetallicframesanexvivostudy |