↓ Skip to main content

Positioning error of custom 3D-printed surgical guides for the radius: influence of fitting location and guide design

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 Mendeley
Title
Positioning error of custom 3D-printed surgical guides for the radius: influence of fitting location and guide design
Published in
International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery, November 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11548-017-1682-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

G. Caiti, J. G. G. Dobbe, G. J. Strijkers, S. D. Strackee, G. J. Streekstra

Abstract

Utilization of 3D-printed patient-specific surgical guides is a promising navigation approach for orthopedic surgery. However, navigation errors can arise if the guide is not correctly positioned at the planned bone location, compromising the surgical outcome. Quantitative measurements of guide positioning errors are rarely reported and have never been related to guide design and underlying bone anatomy. In this study, the positioning accuracy of a standard and an extended guide design with lateral extension is evaluated at different fitting locations (distal, mid-shaft and proximal) on the volar side of the radius. Four operators placed the surgical guides on 3D-printed radius models obtained from the CT scans of six patients. For each radius model, every operator positioned two guide designs on the three fitting locations. The residual positioning error was quantified with a CT-based image analysis method in terms of the mean target registration error (mTRE), total translation error ([Formula: see text]) and total rotation error ([Formula: see text]) by comparing the actual guide position with the preoperatively planned position. Three generalized linear regression models were constructed to evaluate if the fitting location and the guide design affected mTRE, [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text]. mTRE, [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] were significantly higher for mid-shaft guides ([Formula: see text]) compared to distal guides. The guide extension significantly improved the target registration and translational accuracy in all the volar radius locations ([Formula: see text]). However, in the mid-shaft region, the guide extension yielded an increased total rotational error ([Formula: see text]). Our study demonstrates that positioning accuracy depends on the fitting location and on the guide design. In distal and proximal radial regions, the accuracy of guides with lateral extension is higher than standard guides and is therefore recommended for future use.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 78 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 15%
Researcher 12 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 20 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 40%
Engineering 11 14%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 3 4%
Arts and Humanities 2 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 23 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 April 2018.
All research outputs
#4,761,537
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery
#76
of 964 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,040
of 342,377 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery
#1
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 964 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 342,377 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them