Preclinical paired noninferiority study comparing in-house and commercially available 3D planning for corrective osteotomy of the distal radius

3D surgical planning and patient-specific guide design are becoming an established approach in complex skeletal surgery. Traditionally, this is outsourced to commercial companies, but an alternative is to establish an in-house hospital team for the process. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of in-house design with a commercial company. Sixteen patients with extra-articular distal radius malunions requiring surgery were included. A hospital-based team and a surgeon working with an external company independently planned surgery and designed guides for each patient. Accuracy was evaluated by comparing simulated corrections with the planned corrections using 3D-printed bone models. The null hypothesis was that the in-house guides were inferior to the externally purchased ones. Noninferiority margins of 5° for volar tilt and 2 mm for ulnar variance were set. The mean volar tilt error difference between the two guides was 2.3°, and the mean ulnar variance error difference was 0.38 mm, both within the noninferiority limits. The dimensional accuracy of the printed guides before and after sterilization showed minimal variation (less than 0.3 mm). The results demonstrated that in-house surgical planning and guide design for distal radius corrective osteotomies can achieve comparable accuracy to external commercial companies.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2025-04-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-97788-5
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.01

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Preclinical paired noninferiority study comparing in-house and commercially available 3D planning for corrective osteotomy of the distal radius

Anders Björkman, Peter Axelsson, Per Fredrikson, Emilia Gryska et al.
2 citations
Scientific Reports
Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
4.01
article

Preclinical paired noninferiority study comparing in-house and commercially available 3D planning for corrective osteotomy of the distal radius

Anders Björkman, Peter Axelsson, Per Fredrikson, Emilia Gryska, Katleen Libberecht, Charlotte Stor Swinkels
article en
2 citations

Abstract

3D surgical planning and patient-specific guide design are becoming an established approach in complex skeletal surgery. Traditionally, this is outsourced to commercial companies, but an alternative is to establish an in-house hospital team for the process. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of in-house design with a commercial company. Sixteen patients with extra-articular distal radius malunions requiring surgery were included. A hospital-based team and a surgeon working with an external company independently planned surgery and designed guides for each patient. Accuracy was evaluated by comparing simulated corrections with the planned corrections using 3D-printed bone models. The null hypothesis was that the in-house guides were inferior to the externally purchased ones. Noninferiority margins of 5° for volar tilt and 2 mm for ulnar variance were set. The mean volar tilt error difference between the two guides was 2.3°, and the mean ulnar variance error difference was 0.38 mm, both within the noninferiority limits. The dimensional accuracy of the printed guides before and after sterilization showed minimal variation (less than 0.3 mm). The results demonstrated that in-house surgical planning and guide design for distal radius corrective osteotomies can achieve comparable accuracy to external commercial companies.

Scientific ReportsVol. 15(1)
Sahlgrenska University Hospital (SE), University of Gothenburg (SE)
Sahlgrenska Universitetssjukhuset, Göteborgs Universitet
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
4.01
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.