Department of Orthopedics, The Second Affiliated Hospital and Yuying Children's Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, 109 Xue Yuan Xi Road, Wenzhou, 325000, Zhejiang, China.
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2021 Dec;47(6):1699-1712. doi: 10.1007/s00068-020-01532-9. Epub 2020 Nov 1.
The objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the influence of 3D printing technology on the open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of pelvic fractures from current randomized controlled trials and prospective comparative studies.
In this meta-analysis, we conducted electronic searches of Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane library, Web of Science and CNKI up to February 2020. We collected clinical controlled trials using 3D printing-assisted surgery and traditional techniques to assist in pelvic fractures, evaluating the quality of the included studies and extracting data. The data of operation time, blood loss, follow-up function (Majeed function score), quality of fracture reduction (Matta score) and complications (infection, screw loosening, pelvic instability, venous thromboembolism, sacral nerve injury) were extracted. Stata 12.0 software was used for our meta-analysis.
Five RCTs and 2 prospective comparative studies met our inclusion criteria with 174 patients in the 3D printing group and 174 patients in the conventional group. There were significant differences in operation time [SMD = - 2.03], intraoperative blood loss [SMD = - 1.66] and postoperative complications [RR = 0.17] between the 3D group and conventional group. And the excellent and good rate of pelvic fracture reduction in the 3D group [RR = 1.32], the excellent and good rate of pelvic function [RR = 1.29] was superior to the conventional group.
The 3D group showed shorter operation time, less intraoperative blood loss, less complications, better quality of fracture reduction and fast function recovery. Therefore, compared with conventional ORIF, ORIF assisted by 3D printing technology should be a more appropriate treatment of pelvic fractures.
本荟萃分析的目的是评估 3D 打印技术对骨盆骨折切开复位内固定（ORIF）的影响，分析来源于当前的随机对照试验和前瞻性对照研究。
本荟萃分析检索了 Pubmed、Embase、Cochrane 图书馆、Web of Science 和中国知网（CNKI）截至 2020 年 2 月的电子数据库，收集使用 3D 打印辅助手术和传统技术辅助骨盆骨折的临床对照试验，评估纳入研究的质量并提取数据。提取手术时间、出血量、随访功能（Majeed 功能评分）、骨折复位质量（Matta 评分）和并发症（感染、螺钉松动、骨盆不稳定、静脉血栓栓塞、骶神经损伤）的数据。使用 Stata 12.0 软件进行荟萃分析。
纳入了 5 项 RCT 和 2 项前瞻性对照研究，共 174 例患者接受 3D 打印组治疗，174 例患者接受传统组治疗。3D 组与传统组在手术时间[SMD=-2.03]、术中出血量[SMD=-1.66]和术后并发症[RR=0.17]方面存在显著差异。3D 组骨盆骨折复位的优良率[RR=1.32]、骨盆功能的优良率[RR=1.29]优于传统组。
与传统 ORIF 相比，3D 打印辅助 ORIF 具有手术时间更短、术中出血量更少、并发症更少、骨折复位质量更好、功能恢复更快等优点。因此，3D 打印技术辅助 ORIF 治疗骨盆骨折是一种更合适的治疗方法。
