Lou Yiting, Cai Leyi, Wang Chenggui, Tang Qian, Pan Tianlong, Guo Xiaoshan, Wang Jianshun
Department of Orthopaedics, The Second Affiliated Hospital and Yuying Children's Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, 109 Xue Yuan Xi Road, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, 325000, China.
Int Orthop. 2017 Sep;41(9):1875-1880. doi: 10.1007/s00264-017-3445-y. Epub 2017 Apr 10.
This study was conducted to compare traditional surgery and surgery assisted by 3D printing technology in the treatment of tibial plateau fractures. In addition, we also investigated the effect of 3D printing technology on the communication between doctors and patients.
Seventy two patients with tibial plateau fractures were enrolled in the study from April 2014 to October 2015. They were divided into two groups: 34 cases of 3D model group, 38 cases of traditional surgery group. The individual models were used to simulate the surgical procedures and carry out the surgery according to plan. Operation time, blood loss, and number of intra-operative fluoroscopy were recorded. Through the follow-up, the recovery of patients were observed. Besides, we designed questionnaires to verify the satisfaction for both surgeons and patients.
The average operation time, average amount of blood loss, and number of intra-operative fluoroscopy for 3D model group was 85.2±0.9 minutes, 186.3± 5.5ml, 5.3± 0.2 times, and for traditional surgery group was 99.2±1.0 minutes, 216.2 ±6.9 ml,7.1 ± 0.2 times respectively. There was statistically significant difference between the traditional surgery group and 3D model group (P < 0.05). Via follow-up, we can see that the 3D printing group has a better clinical efficacy. The average score of the questionnaires to Patient and doctors were 7.3 ± 0.1 points and 8.5± 0.1 points respectively.
This study suggested the clinical feasibility of 3D printing technology in treatment of tibial plateau fractures.
本研究旨在比较传统手术与3D打印技术辅助手术治疗胫骨平台骨折的效果。此外，我们还研究了3D打印技术对医患沟通的影响。
2014年4月至2015年10月，72例胫骨平台骨折患者纳入本研究。他们被分为两组：3D模型组34例，传统手术组38例。使用个体模型模拟手术过程并按计划进行手术。记录手术时间、失血量和术中透视次数。通过随访，观察患者的恢复情况。此外，我们设计了问卷以核实外科医生和患者的满意度。
3D模型组的平均手术时间、平均失血量和术中透视次数分别为85.2±0.9分钟、186.3±5.5毫升、5.3±0.2次，传统手术组分别为99.2±1.0分钟、216.2±6.9毫升、7.1±0.2次。传统手术组与3D模型组之间存在统计学显著差异（P<0.05）。通过随访，我们可以看到3D打印组具有更好的临床疗效。患者和医生问卷的平均得分分别为7.3±0.1分和8.5±0.1分。
本研究表明3D打印技术治疗胫骨平台骨折具有临床可行性。
