Advertisement

Investigation of pelvic symmetry using CAD software

  • Maha S EadEmail author
  • Kajsa K Duke
  • Jacob L Jaremko
  • Lindsey Westover
Original Article
  • 72 Downloads

Abstract

Severe pelvic fractures often prove difficult for surgeons as they require patient-specific surgical treatment plans and customized equipment. Developing virtual patient-specific 3D pelvis models would ease the surgical planning process and enable development of custom fixation plates. This paper aims to examine pelvic symmetry to conclude whether the contralateral side may be used as a reference model for the fractured side of the pelvis. Fourteen subjects with intact pelvises were involved in this study. CT scans of the pelvises were converted to 3D models and the right sides of the pelvises were reflected and aligned with the left sides. A deviation analysis was then performed for each set of models and results showed that the average root mean square (RMS) of values was 1.14 ± 0.26 mm and the average percentage of points below a deviation threshold of ± 2 mm was 91.9 ± 5.55%. The deviation color maps (DCMs) showed that the largest deviations were on the non-articular surfaces. The volume and surface area of each model were also examined and showed no significant differences between left and right sides. These results indicate that the pelvis displays bilateral symmetry and this concept can be used to develop fully intact patient-specific 3D pelvis models for fracture reconstruction using the unfractured contralateral side.

Graphical Abstract

Keywords

Pelvis 3D models Symmetry Deviation analysis Surgical planning 

Abbreviations

CAD

Computer-aided design

3D

Three dimensional

CT

Computed topography

RMS

Root mean square

DCM

Deviation color map

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Irina Ilic for her assistance in the pelvis digitization process.

Funding information

This work was funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC).

Compliance with ethical standards

In order to use the clinical data, a waiver of consent was received and approval was obtained from the Health Research Ethics Board at the University of Alberta.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Dreizen S, Snodgrasse RM, Webb Peploe H et al (1957) Bilateral symmetry of skeletal maturation in the human hand and wrist. AMA J Dis Child 93:122–127.  https://doi.org/10.1001/archpedi.1957.02060040124004 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Grammer K, Thornhill R (1994) Human (Homo sapiens) facial attractiveness and sexual selection: the role of symmetry and averageness. J Comp Psychol 108:233–242.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7036.108.3.233 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Adams GJ, Simoni DM, Bordelon CB et al (2002) Bilateral symmetry of human carotid artery atherosclerosis. Stroke 33:2575–2580.  https://doi.org/10.1161/01.STR.0000035736.30488.7A CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tümer N, Arbabi V, Gielis WP, de Jong PA, Weinans H, Tuijthof GJM, Zadpoor AA (2019) Three-dimensional analysis of shape variations and symmetry of the fibula, tibia, calcaneus and talus. J Anat 234:132–144.  https://doi.org/10.1111/joa.12900 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vignesh U, Mehrotra D, Dichen, et al (2017) Three dimensional reconstruction of late post traumatic orbital wall defects by customized implants using CAD-CAM, 3D stereolithographic models: A case report. J Oral Biol Craniofacial Res 7:212–218.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobcr.2017.09.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ismail HD, Lubis MF, Djaja YP (2016) The Outcome of Complex Pelvic Fracture after Internal Fixation Surgery. Malaysian Orthop J 10:16–21.  https://doi.org/10.5704/MOJ.1603.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Taller S, Lukás R, Srám J, Krivohlávek M (2005) Urgent management of the complex pelvic fractures. Rozhl Chir 84:83–87PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    (UK) NCGC (2016) Fractures (Complex): Assessment and management. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (UK)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Comstock CP, Van Der Meulen MCH, Goodman SB (1996) Biomechanical comparison of posterior internal fixation techniques for unstable pelvic fractures. J Orthop Trauma 10:517–522.  https://doi.org/10.1097/00005131-199611000-00001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stocks GW, Gabel GT, Noble PC, Hanson GW, Tullos HS (1991) Anterior and posterior internal fixation of vertical shear fractures of the pelvis. J Orthop Res 9:237–245.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.1100090212 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nieminen J, Pakarinen TK, Laitinen M (2013) Orthopaedic reconstruction of complex pelvic bone defects. evaluation of various treatment methods. Scand J Surg 102:36–41.  https://doi.org/10.1177/145749691310200108 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wang D, Wang Y, Wu S et al (2017) Customized a Ti6Al4V bone plate for complex pelvic fracture by selective laser melting. Materials (Basel) 10.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ma10010035 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mehra M, Somohano T, Choi M (2016) Mandibular fibular graft reconstruction with CAD/CAM technology: a clinical report and literature review. J Prosthet Dent 115:123–128.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.05.012 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dell’Aversana Orabona G, Abbate V, Maglitto F et al (2018) Low-cost, self-made CAD/CAM-guiding system for mandibular reconstruction. Surg Oncol 27:200–207.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.suronc.2018.03.007 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Islam K, Dobbe A, Komeili A, Duke K, el-Rich M, Dhillon S, Adeeb S, Jomha NM (2014) Symmetry analysis of talus bone. Bone Joint Res 3:139–145.  https://doi.org/10.1302/2046-3758.35.2000264 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jansen J, Dubois L, Schreurs R et al (2018) Should virtual mirroring be used in the preoperative planning of an orbital reconstruction? J Oral Maxillofac Surg 76:380–387.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2017.09.018 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Boulay C, Tardieu C, Bénaim C et al (2006) Three-dimensional study of pelvic asymmetry on anatomical specimens and its clinical perspectives. J Anat 208:21–33.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7580.2006.00513.x CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Osterhoff G, Petersik A, Sprengel K, Pape HC (2019) Symmetry matching of the medial acetabular surface—a quantitative analysis in view of patient-specific implants. J Orthop Trauma 33:e79–e83.  https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0000000000001373 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhao H, Herman B, Adeeb S et al (2013) Investigation of the geometries of the coronoid process and the fibular allograft as a potential surgical replacement. Clin Biomech 28:626–634.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2013.05.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Komeili A, Westover LM, Parent EC et al (2014) Surface topography asymmetry maps categorizing external deformity in scoliosis. Spine J 14:973-983.e2.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2013.09.032 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Moody ML, Koeneman J, Hettinger E, Karpman RR (1992) The effects of fibular and talar displacement on joint contact areas about the ankle. Orthop Rev 21:741–744PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Federation for Medical and Biological Engineering 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada
  2. 2.Department of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, Faculty of MedicineUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada

Personalised recommendations