Cargando…

3D-Printed Models versus CT Scan and X-Rays Imaging in the Diagnostic Evaluation of Proximal Humerus Fractures: A Triple-Blind Interobserver Reliability Comparison Study

BACKGROUND: Proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) are one of the most frequent fractures in the elderly and are the third most fractures after those of the hip and wrist. PHFs are assessed clinically through conventionally standard imaging (X-ray and computed tomography (CT) scans). The present study ai...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Puglisi, Gianluca, Montemagno, Marco, Denaro, Regina, Condorelli, Giuseppe, Caruso, Vincenzo Fabrizio, Vescio, Andrea, Testa, Gianluca, Pavone, Vito
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9208975/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35733650
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/5863813
_version_ 1784729832234418176
author Puglisi, Gianluca
Montemagno, Marco
Denaro, Regina
Condorelli, Giuseppe
Caruso, Vincenzo Fabrizio
Vescio, Andrea
Testa, Gianluca
Pavone, Vito
author_facet Puglisi, Gianluca
Montemagno, Marco
Denaro, Regina
Condorelli, Giuseppe
Caruso, Vincenzo Fabrizio
Vescio, Andrea
Testa, Gianluca
Pavone, Vito
author_sort Puglisi, Gianluca
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) are one of the most frequent fractures in the elderly and are the third most fractures after those of the hip and wrist. PHFs are assessed clinically through conventionally standard imaging (X-ray and computed tomography (CT) scans). The present study aims to conduct the diagnostic evaluation and therapeutic efficacy of the 3D-printed models (3DPMs) for the PHFs, compared with the standard imaging. OBJECTIVES: In terms of fracture classification and surgical indication, PHFs have poor interobserver agreement between orthopedic surgeons using traditional imaging such as X-rays and CT scan. Our objective is to compare interobserver reliability in diagnostic evaluation of PHFs using 3DPMs compared to traditional imaging. METHODS: The inclusion criteria were elders aged >65 years, fracture classification AO/OTA 11 B and 11 C, and no pathological fractures or polytrauma. In addition, 9 PHFs were assessed by 6 evaluators through a questionnaire and double-blinded administered for each imaging (X-ray and CT scan) and 3DPMs for each fracture. The questionnaire for each method regarded Neer classification, Hertel classification, treatment indication (IT), and surgical technique (ST). Interobserver reliability was calculated through the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: Nine patients with PHF were included in the study (66% female). The Neer and Hertel classifications between imaging types had similar ICC values between raters with no statistical differences. IT reliability using CT scan and 3DPMs (ICC = 1; (p=0.116)) assessed better agreement compared with X-rays IT. The ST reliability using 3DPMs (ICC = 0.755; p=0.002) was statistically superior to traditional imaging (ST-RX ICC = -0.004 (p=0.454); ST-CT ICC = 0.429 (p=0.116)). CONCLUSION: Classification systems like Neer and Hertel offer poor reliability between operators. The 3DPMs for evaluating diagnostics are comparable to CT images but superior to the surgical technique agreement. The application of 3DPMs is effective for preoperative fracture planning and the modeling of patient-specific hardware.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9208975
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Hindawi
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92089752022-06-21 3D-Printed Models versus CT Scan and X-Rays Imaging in the Diagnostic Evaluation of Proximal Humerus Fractures: A Triple-Blind Interobserver Reliability Comparison Study Puglisi, Gianluca Montemagno, Marco Denaro, Regina Condorelli, Giuseppe Caruso, Vincenzo Fabrizio Vescio, Andrea Testa, Gianluca Pavone, Vito Adv Orthop Research Article BACKGROUND: Proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) are one of the most frequent fractures in the elderly and are the third most fractures after those of the hip and wrist. PHFs are assessed clinically through conventionally standard imaging (X-ray and computed tomography (CT) scans). The present study aims to conduct the diagnostic evaluation and therapeutic efficacy of the 3D-printed models (3DPMs) for the PHFs, compared with the standard imaging. OBJECTIVES: In terms of fracture classification and surgical indication, PHFs have poor interobserver agreement between orthopedic surgeons using traditional imaging such as X-rays and CT scan. Our objective is to compare interobserver reliability in diagnostic evaluation of PHFs using 3DPMs compared to traditional imaging. METHODS: The inclusion criteria were elders aged >65 years, fracture classification AO/OTA 11 B and 11 C, and no pathological fractures or polytrauma. In addition, 9 PHFs were assessed by 6 evaluators through a questionnaire and double-blinded administered for each imaging (X-ray and CT scan) and 3DPMs for each fracture. The questionnaire for each method regarded Neer classification, Hertel classification, treatment indication (IT), and surgical technique (ST). Interobserver reliability was calculated through the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: Nine patients with PHF were included in the study (66% female). The Neer and Hertel classifications between imaging types had similar ICC values between raters with no statistical differences. IT reliability using CT scan and 3DPMs (ICC = 1; (p=0.116)) assessed better agreement compared with X-rays IT. The ST reliability using 3DPMs (ICC = 0.755; p=0.002) was statistically superior to traditional imaging (ST-RX ICC = -0.004 (p=0.454); ST-CT ICC = 0.429 (p=0.116)). CONCLUSION: Classification systems like Neer and Hertel offer poor reliability between operators. The 3DPMs for evaluating diagnostics are comparable to CT images but superior to the surgical technique agreement. The application of 3DPMs is effective for preoperative fracture planning and the modeling of patient-specific hardware. Hindawi 2022-06-13 /pmc/articles/PMC9208975/ /pubmed/35733650 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/5863813 Text en Copyright © 2022 Gianluca Puglisi et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Puglisi, Gianluca
Montemagno, Marco
Denaro, Regina
Condorelli, Giuseppe
Caruso, Vincenzo Fabrizio
Vescio, Andrea
Testa, Gianluca
Pavone, Vito
3D-Printed Models versus CT Scan and X-Rays Imaging in the Diagnostic Evaluation of Proximal Humerus Fractures: A Triple-Blind Interobserver Reliability Comparison Study
title 3D-Printed Models versus CT Scan and X-Rays Imaging in the Diagnostic Evaluation of Proximal Humerus Fractures: A Triple-Blind Interobserver Reliability Comparison Study
title_full 3D-Printed Models versus CT Scan and X-Rays Imaging in the Diagnostic Evaluation of Proximal Humerus Fractures: A Triple-Blind Interobserver Reliability Comparison Study
title_fullStr 3D-Printed Models versus CT Scan and X-Rays Imaging in the Diagnostic Evaluation of Proximal Humerus Fractures: A Triple-Blind Interobserver Reliability Comparison Study
title_full_unstemmed 3D-Printed Models versus CT Scan and X-Rays Imaging in the Diagnostic Evaluation of Proximal Humerus Fractures: A Triple-Blind Interobserver Reliability Comparison Study
title_short 3D-Printed Models versus CT Scan and X-Rays Imaging in the Diagnostic Evaluation of Proximal Humerus Fractures: A Triple-Blind Interobserver Reliability Comparison Study
title_sort 3d-printed models versus ct scan and x-rays imaging in the diagnostic evaluation of proximal humerus fractures: a triple-blind interobserver reliability comparison study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9208975/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35733650
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/5863813
work_keys_str_mv AT puglisigianluca 3dprintedmodelsversusctscanandxraysimaginginthediagnosticevaluationofproximalhumerusfracturesatripleblindinterobserverreliabilitycomparisonstudy
AT montemagnomarco 3dprintedmodelsversusctscanandxraysimaginginthediagnosticevaluationofproximalhumerusfracturesatripleblindinterobserverreliabilitycomparisonstudy
AT denaroregina 3dprintedmodelsversusctscanandxraysimaginginthediagnosticevaluationofproximalhumerusfracturesatripleblindinterobserverreliabilitycomparisonstudy
AT condorelligiuseppe 3dprintedmodelsversusctscanandxraysimaginginthediagnosticevaluationofproximalhumerusfracturesatripleblindinterobserverreliabilitycomparisonstudy
AT carusovincenzofabrizio 3dprintedmodelsversusctscanandxraysimaginginthediagnosticevaluationofproximalhumerusfracturesatripleblindinterobserverreliabilitycomparisonstudy
AT vescioandrea 3dprintedmodelsversusctscanandxraysimaginginthediagnosticevaluationofproximalhumerusfracturesatripleblindinterobserverreliabilitycomparisonstudy
AT testagianluca 3dprintedmodelsversusctscanandxraysimaginginthediagnosticevaluationofproximalhumerusfracturesatripleblindinterobserverreliabilitycomparisonstudy
AT pavonevito 3dprintedmodelsversusctscanandxraysimaginginthediagnosticevaluationofproximalhumerusfracturesatripleblindinterobserverreliabilitycomparisonstudy