ArticleMusculoskeletal surgery2020
Pelvic discontinuity in acetabular revisions: does CT scan overestimate it? A comparative study of diagnostic accuracy of 3D-modeling and traditional 3D CT scan.
Article in Musculoskeletal surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mid-Term Clinical and Radiographic Results of Complex Hip Revision Arthroplasty Based on 3D Life-Sized Model: A Prospective Case Series.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- A comparison between 3D printed models and standard 2D planning in the use of metal block augments in revision knee arthroplasty.Joint diseases and related surgery · 2024Observational
- Review
- Proximal femoral defect classifications in revision total hip arthroplasty from X-rays imaging to advanced 3D imaging: a narrative review.Annals of joint · 2024Review
- Efficacy of High-Resolution Preoperative 3D Reconstructions for Lesion Localization in Oncological Colorectal Surgery-First Pilot Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Pelvic discontinuity: a challenge to overcome.EFORT open reviews · 2021Review
- Application of 3D Printing in Hip and Knee Arthroplasty: A Narrative Review.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2021Review
- Decision/therapeutic algorithm for acetabular revisions.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2020Article
- Use of 3D modelling and 3D printing for the diagnostic process, decision making and preoperative planning of periprosthetic acetabular fractures.BMJ case reports · 2020Article
- A New Diagnostic Approach for Periprosthetic Acetabular Fractures Based on 3D Modeling: A Study Protocol.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose3D CT scan is actually the gold standard for preoperative diagnosis of pelvic discontinuity (PD) in hip revision surgery. Aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of 3D-modeling with traditional and 3D CT scan. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe retrospectively identified 56 patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty revisions with Paprosky Type-3 periacetabular bone defects. Preoperative X-rays, CT scans and 3D-models were blindly reviewed by two orthopedic surgeons to detect possible pelvic discontinuities. Results were compared with surgical notes. Independent sensitivities, specificities, positive predictive values and negative predictive values were calculated for X-rays, CT scan and 3D models. Analysis of interobserver reliability was performed.
resultsFifty-six patients met inclusion criteria. In nine patients, surgical notes indicated a pelvic discontinuity. On 3D CT scans, PD was identified in 25 cases for observer 1 and in 24 cases for observer 2. Analyzing 3D-models, PD was identified in eleven patients by both observers. The nine patients, with PD reported on the surgical report, were all identified with both the techniques. The specificity of standard 3D CT was 0.66 for observer 1 and 0.68 for observer 2 and increased to 0.96 for both observers with the utilization of 3D-models. The positive predictive value increased from 0.36 (observer 1) and 0.38 (observer 2) with the CT evaluation to 0.82 in the 3D-models evaluation. The analysis of 3D models was characterized by a perfect intraobserver reliability (intraobserver correlation coefficient = 1). The observers showed substantial agreement for PD classification; the kappa values were 0.96 and 0.77, respectively, for CT scan and 3D-model evaluation.
conclusions3D-modeling showed higher specificity than traditional and 3D CT scans in identification of PD in Paprosky Type-3 periacetabular bone defects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31090014What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.