RESUMO
Augmented reality (AR) and 3D printing (3DP) are novel technologies in the orthopedic field. Over the past decade, enthusiasm for these new digital applications has driven new perspectives in improving diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity in the field of traumatology. Currently, however, it is still difficult to quantify their value and impact in the medical-scientific field, especially in the improvement of diagnostics in complex fractures. Acetabular fractures have always been a challenge in orthopedics, due to their volumetric complexity and low diagnostic reliability. Background/Objectives: The goal of this study was to determine whether these methods could improve the learning aspect and diagnostic accuracy of complex acetabular fractures compared to gold-standard CT (computed tomography). Methods: Orthopedic residents of our department were selected and divided into Junior (JUN) and Senior (SEN) groups. Associated fractures of acetabulum were included in the study, and details of these were provided as CT scans, 3DP models, and AR models displayed on a tablet screen. In a double-blind questionnaire, each resident classified every fracture. Diagnostic accuracy (DA), response time (RT), agreement (R), and confidence (C) were measured. Results: Twenty residents (JUN = 10, SEN = 10) classified five fractures. Overall DA was 26% (CT), 18% (3DP), and 29% (AR). AR-DA was superior to 3DP-DA (p = 0.048). DA means (JUN vs. SEN, respectively): CT-DA was 20% vs. 32% (p < 0.05), 3DP-DA was 12% vs. 24% (p = 0.08), and AR-DA was 28% vs. 30% (p = 0.80). Overall RT was 61.2 s (±24.6) for CT, 35.8 s (±20.1) for 3DP, and 46.7 s (±20.8) for AR. R was fairly poor between methods and groups. Overall, 3DPs had superior C (65%). Conclusions: AR had the same overall DA as CT, independent of experience, 3DP had minor differences in DA and R, but it was the fastest method and the one in which there was the most confidence. Intra- and inter-observer R between methods remained very poor in residents.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Syndesmotic injuries are common lesions associated with ankle fractures. Static and dynamic fixation are frequently used in syndesmotic injury-associated ankle fractures. The purpose of this study is to compare short- and mid-term quality of life, clinical outcomes, and gait after static stabilization with a trans-syndesmotic screw or dynamic stabilization with a suture button device. METHODS: Here, 230 patients were enrolled in a retrospective observational study. They were divided in two groups according to the fixation procedure (Arthrex TightRope®, Munich, Germany) synthesis vs. osteosynthesis with a 3.5 mm trans-syndesmotic tricortical screw). They then underwent clinical assessment using the American Foot and Ankle Score (AOFAS) at 1, 2, 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery. Quality of life was assessed according to the EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) at 2 and 24 months after surgery in the follow-up; gait analysis was performed 2 and 24 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Significant differences were found at a two-month follow-up according to the AOFAS (p = 0.0001) and EQ-5D (p = 0.0208) scores. No differences were noted in the other follow-ups (p > 0.05) or gait analysis. CONCLUSION: The dynamic and static fixation of syndesmotic injuries in ankle fracture are both efficacious and valid procedures for avoiding ankle instability. The suture button device was comparable to the screw fixation according to functional outcomes and gait analysis.