Department of Anesthesiology, Wuhan Fourth Hospital; Puai Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Department of Orthopaedics, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
J Int Med Res. 2020 May;48(5):300060520924250. doi: 10.1177/0300060520924250.
This study was performed to compare the clinical outcomes of traditional three-dimensional (3D) printing technology and 3D printing mirror model technology in the treatment of isolated acetabular fractures.
Prospectively maintained databases were reviewed to retrospectively compare patients with an isolated acetabular fracture who were treated with traditional 3D printing technology (Group T) or 3D printing mirror model technology (Group M) from 2011 to 2017. In total, 146 advanced-age patients (146 hips) with an isolated acetabular fracture (Group T, n = 72; Group M, n = 74) were assessed for a mean follow-up period of 29 months (range, 24-34 months). The primary endpoint was the postoperative Harris hip score (HHS). The secondary endpoints were the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, fluoroscopy screening time, fracture reduction quality, and incidence of postoperative complications at the final follow-up.
The HHS, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, fluoroscopy screening time, and incidence of postoperative complications were significantly different between the groups, with Group M showing superior clinical outcomes.
In patients with an isolated acetabular fracture, 3D printing mirror model technology might lead to more accurate and efficient treatment than traditional 3D printing technology.
本研究旨在比较传统三维（3D）打印技术和 3D 打印镜像模型技术在治疗孤立性髋臼骨折中的临床疗效。
回顾性分析 2011 年至 2017 年采用传统 3D 打印技术（T 组）或 3D 打印镜像模型技术（M 组）治疗的孤立性髋臼骨折患者的前瞻性数据库资料。共评估了 146 例年龄较大的孤立性髋臼骨折患者（146 髋；T 组 72 例，M 组 74 例），平均随访 29 个月（24~34 个月）。主要终点是术后 Harris 髋关节评分（HHS）。次要终点是手术时间、术中失血量、透视筛查时间、骨折复位质量以及末次随访时的术后并发症发生率。
两组间 HHS、手术时间、术中失血量、透视筛查时间和术后并发症发生率差异有统计学意义，M 组的临床结果更优。
在孤立性髋臼骨折患者中，3D 打印镜像模型技术可能比传统 3D 打印技术更能实现准确、高效的治疗。
