Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of the feasibility of 3D printing technology in the treatment of pelvic fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and prospective comparative studies

  • Review Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

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.

Methods

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.

Results

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.

Conclusions

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Tile M. Acute pelvic fractures: I. Causation and classification. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 1996;4(3):143–51.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Breuil V, Roux CH, Carle GF. Pelvic fractures: epidemiology, consequences, and medical management. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2016;28(4):442–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Abrassart S, Stern R, Peter R. Unstable pelvic ring injury with hemodynamic instability: what seems the best procedure choice and sequence in the initial management? Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2013;99(2):175–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Sheth R, Balesh ER, Zhang YS, Hirsch JA, Khademhosseini A, Oklu R. Three-dimensional printing: an enabling technology for IR. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2016;27(6):859–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Mao ZG, Jiang YW, Mao JH, Tong PJ. Application of 3D printing technology in the complex acetabular prosthesis revision surgery:a case report. Zhongguo Gu Shang. 2016;29(11):1058–60.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group P. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Chandler J, Welch VA, Higgins JP, et al. Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews a new edition of the cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;10:ED000142.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Chuling F, Hui H, Zuojun X. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomized studies. Syst Rev Meta PloS one. 2016;13(12):e0208725.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Lin L. Feasibility study of 3D printing technology in the treatment of complex pelvic fractures. Modern Hosp. 2018;18(6):883–90.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Chen X, Chen B, Li T, Shi S, Zhu Y. Clinical analysis of 3D printing technique assisted anterior minimally invasive approach in the treatment of unstable pelvic fracture. Progress Modern Biomed. 2018;018(12):2325–8.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Lan XY, Zhang ZP, Dong YE, Liao XQ, Orthopedics DO. Application value of 3D printing technique in pelvic fracture repair. China Modern Med. 2018;1:4–7.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Wang Z. Application value of 3D printing technique in patients with freshly closed pelvic fractur. Internat Med Health Guidance News. 2017;23(23):3695–8.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Li M, Chen R, Zhong H. Application of 3D printing in digital design of pelvic fracture. Med Equip. 2018;31(17):1–2.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Fan L, He B, Wang B, Qin H, Wang Y. Appficafion of 3D printing technology and individualized treatment in pelvic fracture. Orthop Biomech Mater Clin Study. 2018;15(2):44–7.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Huang L, Wu P. The application and curative effect of 3D printing in pelvic fracture surgery. Health Guide. 2017;7:176.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Majeed SA. Grading the outcome of pelvic fractures. J Bone Jt Surg Br. 1989;71(2):304–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Matta JM, Tornetta P 3rd. Internal fixation of unstable pelvic ring injuries. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996;329:129–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. JM M. Operative treatment of acetabular fractures through the ilioinguinal approach. A 10-year perspective. Clin orthop related res. 1994;305:10–9.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Cai L, Zhang Y, Chen C, Lou Y, Guo X, Wang J. 3D printing-based minimally invasive cannulated screw treatment of unstable pelvic fracture. J Orthop Surg Res. 2018;13(1):71.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Li L, Gao J, Bi L, Yuan Z, Pei G. Comparison of three-dimensional printing and conventional imaging in surgical treatment of Tile C pelvic fractures: a long-term follow-up study. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2017;10(8):12433–9.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hung CC, Li YT, Chou YC, Chen JE, Wu CC, Shen HC, et al. Conventional plate fixation method versus pre-operative virtual simulation and three-dimensional printing-assisted contoured plate fixation method in the treatment of anterior pelvic ring fracture. Int Orthop. 2019;43(2):425–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Bruyere F, Leroux C, Brunereau L, Lermusiaux P. Rapid prototyping model for percutaneous nephrolithotomy training. J Endourol. 2008;22(1):91–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Lim CG, Campbell DI, Clucas DM. Rapid prototyping technology in orbital floor reconstruction: application in three patients. Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr. 2014;7(2):143–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Sodian R, Schmauss D, Schmitz C, Bigdeli A, Haeberle S, Schmoeckel M, et al. 3-dimensional printing of models to create custom-made devices for coil embolization of an anastomotic leak after aortic arch replacement. Ann Thorac Surg. 2009;88(3):974–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Schievano S, Migliavacca F, Coats L, Khambadkone S, Carminati M, Wilson N, et al. Percutaneous pulmonary valve implantation based on rapid prototyping of right ventricular outflow tract and pulmonary trunk from MR data. Radiology. 2007;242(2):490–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Mottl-Link S, Hubler M, Kuhne T, Rietdorf U, Krueger JJ, Schnackenburg B, et al. Physical models aiding in complex congenital heart surgery. Ann Thorac Surg. 2008;86(1):273–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Toso F, Zuiani C, Vergendo M, Salvo I, Robiony M, Politi M, et al. Usefulness of computed tomography in pre-surgical evaluation of maxillo-facial pathology with rapid prototyping and surgical pre-planning by virtual reality. Radiol Med. 2005;110(5–6):665–75.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Chow LK, Cheung LK. The usefulness of stereomodels in maxillofacial surgical management. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007;65(11):2260–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Zhou LB, Shang HT, He LS, Bo B, Liu GC, Liu YP, et al. Accurate reconstruction of discontinuous mandible using a reverse engineering/computer-aided design/rapid prototyping technique: a preliminary clinical study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;68(9):2115–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Parchi PD, Ferrari V, Piolanti N, Andreani L, Condino S, Evangelisti G, et al. Computer tomography prototyping and virtual procedure simulation in difficult cases of hip replacement surgery. Surg Technol Int. 2013;23:228–34.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Jeong HS, Park KJ, Kil KM, Chong S, Eun HJ, Lee TS, et al. Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis using 3D printing for shaft fractures of clavicles: technical note. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2014;134(11):1551–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Murray DJ, Edwards G, Mainprize JG, Antonyshyn O. Advanced technology in the management of fibrous dysplasia. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2008;61(8):906–16.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Ciocca L, Fantini M, De Crescenzio F, Persiani F, Scotti R. Computer-aided design and manufacturing construction of a surgical template for craniofacial implant positioning to support a definitive nasal prosthesis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22(8):850–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Jirman R, Horak Z, Mazanek J, Reznicek J. Individual replacement of the frontal bone defect: case report. Prague Med Rep. 2009;110(1):79–84.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding sources.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Jinwu Wang, Xingyu Wang, and Bingzhang Wang contributed equally to this work and should be considered as co-first authors.

  2. Hua Chen and Leyi Cai contributed equally to this work and should be considered as co-corresponding authors.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 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

    Jinwu Wang, Xingyu Wang, Bingzhang Wang, Linzhen Xie, Wenhao Zheng, Hua Chen & Leyi Cai

Authors
  1. Jinwu Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xingyu Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bingzhang Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Linzhen Xie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Wenhao Zheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Hua Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Leyi Cai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leyi Cai.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, J., Wang, X., Wang, B. et al. Comparison of the feasibility of 3D printing technology in the treatment of pelvic fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and prospective comparative studies. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg 47, 1699–1712 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-020-01532-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-020-01532-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation