Holographic Reconstructions for Preoperative Planning before Partial Nephrectomy: A Head-to-Head Comparison with Standard CT Scan

2018 ◽  
Vol 102 (2) ◽  
pp. 212-217 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Antonelli ◽  
Alessandro Veccia ◽  
Carlotta Palumbo ◽  
Angelo Peroni ◽  
Giuseppe Mirabella ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 199 (4S) ◽  
Author(s):  
Egor Parkhomenko ◽  
Shoaib Safiullah ◽  
Michael Owyong ◽  
Sartaaj Walia ◽  
Mitchell O’Leary ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. e2269
Author(s):  
R. Schiavina ◽  
L. Bianchi ◽  
A. Angiolini ◽  
U. Barbaresi ◽  
B. Bortolani ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 2473011420S0049
Author(s):  
Caroline Williams ◽  
John Y. Kwon ◽  
Max Michalski ◽  
Christopher P. Miller

Category: Other; Ankle; Midfoot/Forefoot Introduction/Purpose: Computed tomography (CT) advanced imaging techniques are a valuable tool for orthopedic surgeons when evaluating complex foot and ankle pathology. With advances in CT data processing, surgeons can create custom reformation of the imaging data in real time using postprocessing imaging tools. This article presents a technique describing how to manipulate CT data using two of these tools, multiplanar reformation (MPR) and maximal intensity projection (MIP), to better visualize pathology and allow a more definitive diagnosis preoperatively. Despite their availability on most modern picture archiving and communication systems, most surgeons across orthopaedics disciplines fail to utilize these powerful tools. Methods: Patients with complex midfoot deformities underwent CT scans for diagnosis and preoperative planning. Case 1 underwent percutaneous pinning of multiple metatarsal fractures. Post-operatively she had severe pain localized to the second and third metatarsals. A CT scan obtained in standard axes failed to interpret the multiplanar deformities when viewed initially on PACS. Using MPR/MIP, the axes were rotated to generate a detailed view of the deformities and subsequently template osteotomies. Case two underwent arthrodesis of the second and third tarsometatarsal (TMT) joints for an unstable Lisfranc injury. Post-operatively she presented with severe midfoot pain prohibiting her return to athletics. Radiographs demonstrated normal alignment with hardware obscuring the joints. Standard CT axes were difficult to interpret due to metal artifact and oblique planes of the TMT joints. MPR/MIP reformatting allowed metal artifact reduction through axes adjustment, improving visualization and facilitating diagnosis of nonunion of the second and third TMT fusions. Results: Case One:MIP/MPR allowed manipulation of the CT scan in the axial and coronal planes provided a sagittal reformat of the entire second and third metatarsals. The second metatarsal had a gradual plantarflexion malunion of the diaphysis. The third metatarsal had an acute plantarflexed deformity of the metatarsal neck. Reformatting provided an accurate preoperative template for planned dorsiflexion osteotomies. Case Two: Metal artifact and the oblique orientation of the TMT joints prevented evaluation of previous fusions. MIP/MPR reformatting provided axes which were perpendicular to the TMT joints decreased metal artifact and demonstrated nonunion of the previous fusions. Use of MIP/MPR in this case provided valuable diagnostic information regarding the source of pain and a plan for removal of hardware and revision TMT fusions. Conclusion: The MPR/MIP function is available in most PACS systems and allows customizable CT reformats. The technique is easy to learn and can be done quickly in the office or pre-operative setting. The technology has facilitated streamlined pre- operative planning and improvements in injury visualization numerous times, particularly in complex deformities and trauma. Using MIP/MPR reformats, the authors have been able to identify critical fracture lines and relationships between anatomic structures which may otherwise have been missed or less precisely understood. The authors hope that this article will enhance awareness and encourage others to utilize this powerful technology.


2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (6) ◽  
pp. e2727
Author(s):  
L. Bianchi ◽  
R. Schiavina ◽  
L. Bianchi ◽  
U. Barbaresi ◽  
B. Bortolani ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. e2150
Author(s):  
A. Antonelli ◽  
A. Veccia ◽  
C. Palumbo ◽  
A. Peroni ◽  
G. Mirabella ◽  
...  

2002 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 651-656 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Fortin ◽  
Guillaume Champleboux ◽  
Silvio Bianchi ◽  
Hervé Buatois ◽  
Jean-Loup Coudert

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (6) ◽  
pp. 503-512 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dietmar Krappinger ◽  
Peter Schwendinger ◽  
Richard A. Lindtner

Abstract Objective Safe posterior column screw fixation via an anterior approach under two-dimensional fluoroscopic control. Indications Anterior column with posterior hemitransverse fractures (ACPHF); transverse fractures; two-column fractures and T‑type fractures without relevant residual displacement of the posterior column after reduction of the anterior column and the quadrilateral plate. Contraindication Acetabular fractures requiring direct open reduction via a posterior approach; very narrow osseous corridor in preoperative planning; insufficient intraoperative fluoroscopic visualization of the anatomical landmarks. Surgical technique Preoperative planning of the starting point and screw trajectory using a standard pelvic CT scan and a multiplanar reconstruction tool. Intraoperative fluoroscopically controlled identification of the starting point using the anterior–posterior (ap) view. Advancing the guidewire under fluoroscopic control using the lateral–oblique view. Lag screw fixation of the posterior column with cannulated screws. Postoperative management Partial weight bearing as advised by the surgeon. Postoperative CT scan for the assessment of screw position and quality of reduction of the posterior column. Generally no implant removal. Results In a series of 100 pelvic CT scans, the mean posterior angle of the ideal posterior column screw trajectory was 28.0° (range 11.1–46.2°) to the coronal plane and the mean medial angle was 21.6° (range 8.0–35.0°) to the sagittal plane. The maximum screw length was 106.3 mm (range 82.1–135.0 mm). Twelve patients were included in this study: 10 ACPHF and 2 transverse fractures. The residual maximum displacement of the posterior column fracture component in the postoperative CT scan was 1.4 mm (0–4 mm). There was one intraarticular screw penetration and one perforation of the cortical bone in the transition zone between the posterior column and the sciatic tuber without neurological impairment.


2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 230949901668475 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arash Nabavi ◽  
Caroline M Olwill ◽  
Mike Do ◽  
Tanya Wanasawage ◽  
Ian A Harris

Purpose: To assess the accuracy of total knee replacements (TKRs) performed using CT-based patient-specific instrumentation by postoperative CT scan. Method: Approval from the Ethics Committee was granted prior to commencement of this study. Fifty prospective and consecutive patients who had undergone TKR (Evolis, Medacta International) using CT-based patient-specific instrumentation (MY KNEE, Medacta International) were assessed postoperatively using a CT scan and the validated Perth protocol measurement technique. The hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle of the lower limb in the coronal plane; the coronal, sagittal, and rotational orientation of the femoral component; and the coronal and sagittal orientation of the tibial component were measured. These results were then compared to each patient’s preoperative planning. The percentage of patients found to be less than or equal to 3° of planned alignment was calculated. One patient was excluded as the femoral cutting block did not fit the femur as predicted by planning and therefore underwent a conventional TKR. Results: Ninety-eight percent of patients were within 3° of planned alignment in the coronal plane reproducing the predicted HKA angle. Predicted coronal plane orientation of the tibial and femoral component was achieved in 100% and 96% of patients, respectively. The sagittal orientation of the femoral component was within 3° in 98% of patients. The planned sagittal positioning of the tibial component was achieved in 92% of patients. Furthermore, 90% of patients were found to have a femoral rotation within 3° of planning. Eighty-six percent of patients achieved good-to-excellent outcome at 12 months (Oxford Knee Score > 34). Conclusion: We have found that TKR using this patient-specific instrumentation accurately reproduces preoperative planning in all six of the parameters measured in this study.


2005 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 382-387 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric H. Holbrook ◽  
Christopher L. Brown ◽  
Elizabeth R. Lyden ◽  
Donald A. Leopold

Background The sinonasal computer tomography (CT) scan is frequently used to help confirm the diagnosis of rhinosinusitis. However, little data exist correlating patient symptoms with CT findings. Methods Immediately preceding CT of the sinuses, 94 subjects without evidence of trauma, nasal tumors, or previous sinus surgery completed the Rhinosinusitis Outcome Measure 31 symptom questionnaire and were asked to locate areas of facial pain or pressure. CT scans were graded according to the Lund-MacKay system, and agger nasi and ethmoid bulla cells were measured. Data from CT scans and symptom/pain questionnaire responses were analyzed for significant correlations. Results No correlation was identified when comparing total Lund-MacKay scores, opacification of individual sinuses, and size of the agger nasi and ethmoid bulla cells with the Rhinosinusitis Outcome Measure 31 subset scores and areas of facial pain or pressure. Conclusion The sinus CT scan is a necessary tool for preoperative planning; however, it should not be used to predict symptoms or to localize areas responsible for facial pain or pressure.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document