ArticleClinical orthopaedics and related research2019
Using Laser Range-finding to Measure Bore Depth in Surgical Drilling of Bone.
Article in Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Usability and acceptability of a power tool with electronic depth gauge for orthopedic drilling - a preclinical randomized controlled trial in sawbones.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2025Trial
- Accuracy of a new innovative automatic sensor system (ADEPTHEuropean journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2025Article
- Smart Drill for a Streamlined Estimation of the Drilling Angle and Channel Length in Orthopedic Surgical Procedures.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Review of Enhanced Handheld Surgical Drills.Critical reviews in biomedical engineering · 2023Review
- Factors Associated With the Accuracy of Depth Gauge Measurements.Frontiers in surgery · 2021Article
- CORR Insights®: Using Laser Range-finding to Measure Bore Depth in Surgical Drilling of Bone.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMeasuring drilled bore depth in bone is an important part of osteosynthesis surgery. Current methods have substantial limitations in terms of reliability, leading to placement of incorrectly sized screws and unsatisfactory user experience. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Can a prototype laser range-finder measure bore depth in bone as well as or better than a conventional depth gauge in terms of accuracy and precision (that is, variability)?
methodsA conventional analog orthopaedic surgical depth gauge was compared with a laser range-finder-based prototype. Experiments were conducted on four pig hind limbs, with bicortical holes drilled in the femur and the tibia. Two surgeons alternated drilling bores in three different clinically relevant conditions: straight drilling through the diaphysis, angled drilling through the diaphysis, and straight drilling through the metaphysis. Depth measurements were taken with the laser range-finder-based prototype, and the conventional depth gauge and compared against depth measurements obtained from a CT image that served as the reference measurement.
resultsIn straight diaphyseal drilling the laser range-finder-based prototype had a larger mean error of 1.34 mm (± 0.7 mm) compared with a mean error of -0.06 mm (± 1.38 mm) using the conventional gauge (95% CI 0.824 to 1.976; p < 0.001). In angled diaphyseal drilling, there was no difference in mean error between the laser range-finder-based prototype (1.66 ± 0.86 mm) and the conventional gauge (2.36 ± 3.79 mm [95% CI -2.338 to 0.938]; p = 0.393). In straight metaphyseal drilling, there was no difference in mean error between the laser range-finder-based prototype (2.11 ± 0.8 mm) and the conventional gauge (1.51 ± 3.19 mm [95% CI -0.500 to 1.700]; p = 0.280). The laser range-finder-based prototype had greater precision (smaller variance) than the conventional depth gauge in straight diaphyseal drilling (p < 0.001), angled diaphyseal drilling (p < 0.001), and straight metaphyseal drilling (p < 0.001).
conclusionsA laser range-finder-based prototype mounted on a conventional surgical drill demonstrated overall similar accuracy and better precision in measuring drilled bore depth in bone compared with the conventional depth gauge. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: A device based on this concept could improve the reliability of bore depth measurement in surgical practice and could therefore reduce the frequency of screw replacement and associated complications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.