No abstract

No abstract

Bioprinting is one of several newly emerged tissue engineering strategies that hold great promise in alleviating of organ shortage crisis. To date, a range of living biological constructs have already been fabricated in vitro using this technology. However, an in vitro approach may have several intrinsic limitations regarding its clinical applicability in some cases. A possible solution is in vivo bioprinting, in which the de novo tissues/organs are to be directly fabricated and positioned at the damaged site in the living body. This strategy would be particularly effective in the treatment of tissues/organs that can be safely arrested and immobilized during bioprinting. Proof-of-concept studies on in vivo bioprinting have been reported recently, on the basis of which this paper reviews the current state-of-the-art bioprinting technologies with a particular focus on their advantages and challenges for the in vivo application.

No abstract

In the treatment of closed tibial plafond fractures, both two-staged ORIF and LIFEF offer similar results. Patients undergo LIFEF carry significantly greater radiation exposure and higher superficial soft tissue infection rate (usually occurs on pin tract and does not affect the final outcomes).

Background:Old pelvis fractures are among the most challenging fractures to treat because of their complex anatomy, difficult-to-access surgical sites, and the relatively low incidence of such cases. Proper evaluation and surgical planning are necessary to achieve the pelvic ring symmetry and stable fixation of the fracture. The goal of this study was to assess the use of three-dimensional (3D) printing techniques for surgical management of old pelvic fractures.Methods:First, 16 dried human cadaveric pelvises were used to confirm the anatomical accuracy of the 3D models printed based on radiographic data. Next, nine clinical cases between January 2009 and April 2013 were used to evaluate the surgical reconstruction based on the 3D printed models. The pelvic injuries were all type C, and the average time from injury to reconstruction was 11 weeks (range: 8–17 weeks). The workflow consisted of: (1) Printing patient-specific bone models based on preoperative computed tomography (CT) scans, (2) virtual fracture reduction using the printed 3D anatomic template, (3) virtual fracture fixation using Kirschner wires, and (4) preoperatively measuring the osteotomy and implant position relative to landmarks using the virtually defined deformation. These models aided communication between surgical team members during the procedure. This technique was validated by comparing the preoperative planning to the intraoperative procedure.Results:The accuracy of the 3D printed models was within specification. Production of a model from standard CT DICOM data took 7 hours (range: 6–9 hours). Preoperative planning using the 3D printed models was feasible in all cases. Good correlation was found between the preoperative planning and postoperative follow-up X-ray in all nine cases. The patients were followed for 3–29 months (median: 5 months). The fracture healing time was 9–17 weeks (mean: 10 weeks). No delayed incision healing, wound infection, or nonunions occurred. The results were excellent in two cases, good in five, and poor in two based on the Majeed score.Conclusions:The 3D printing planning technique for pelvic surgery was successfully integrated into a clinical workflow to improve patient-specific preoperative planning by providing a visual and haptic model of the injury and allowing patient-specific adaptation of each osteosynthesis implant to the virtually reduced pelvis.

Background:Sacroiliac (SI) screw fixation is a demanding technique, with a high rate of screw malposition due to the complex pelvic anatomy. TiRobot™ is an orthopedic surgery robot which can be used for SI screw fixation. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of robot-assisted placement of SI screws compared with a freehand technique.Methods:Thirty patients requiring posterior pelvic ring stabilization were randomized to receive freehand or robot-assisted SI screw fixation, between January 2016 and June 2016 at Beijing Jishuitan Hospital. Forty-five screws were placed at levels S1 and S2. In both methods, the primary end point screw position was assessed and classified using postoperative computed tomography. Fisher's exact probability test was used to analyze the screws’ positions. Secondary end points, such as duration of trajectory planning, surgical time after reduction of the pelvis, insertion time for guide wire, number of guide wire attempts, and radiation exposure without pelvic reduction, were also assessed.Results:Twenty-three screws were placed in the robot-assisted group and 22 screws in the freehand group; no postoperative complications or revisions were reported. The excellent and good rate of screw placement was 100% in the robot-assisted group and 95% in the freehand group. The P value (0.009) showed the same superiority in screw distribution. The fluoroscopy time after pelvic reduction in the robot-assisted group was significantly shorter than that in the freehand group (median [Q1, Q3]: 6.0 [6.0, 9.0] s vs. median [Q1, Q3]: 36.0 [21.5, 48.0] s; χ2 = 13.590, respectively, P < 0.001); no difference in operation time after reduction of the pelvis was noted (χ2 = 1.990, P = 0.158). Time for guide wire insertion was significantly shorter for the robot-assisted group than that for the freehand group (median [Q1, Q3]: 2.0 [2.0, 2.7] min vs. median [Q1, Q3]: 19.0 [15.5, 45.0] min; χ2 = 20.952, respectively, P < 0.001). The number of guide wire attempts in the robot-assisted group was significantly less than that in the freehand group (median [Q1, Q3]: 1.0 [1.0,1.0] time vs. median [Q1, Q3]: 7.0 [1.0, 9.0] times; χ2 = 15.771, respectively, P < 0.001). The instrumented SI levels did not differ between both groups (from S1 to S2, χ2 = 4.760, P = 0.093).Conclusions:Accuracy of the robot-assisted technique was superior to that of the freehand technique. Robot-assisted navigation is safe for unstable posterior pelvic ring stabilization, especially in S1, but also in S2. SI screw insertion with robot-assisted navigation is clinically feasible.

The aim of this study was to compare the results between two surgical options for distal tibia fracture, i.e. minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) vs. open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), and explore the benefits and defects of these two techniques. Thirty cases of distal tibia fracture (15 pairs of ORIF and MIPO) were submitted for pair comparison with consistence of gender, age and AO fracture classification. Indexes for evaluation included operative time, blood loss, healing time, time of recovery to work, implant irritation symptoms, and union status. Mazur grading standard was introduced for functional evaluation. Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) 13.0 was used for analysis. No malunion occurred and one case of osteomyelitis developed in the ORIF group. In the ORIF group, ten cases were evaluated as excellent, three as good, one as fair and one as poor. In the MIPO group, ten cases were excellent and five good. Paired t-test found no significant differences between groups on the indexes for analysis. In conclusion, the MIPO technique is not distinctively superior to ORIF in treatment of distal tibia fracture.