Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorSadeghi, Majid Mohammad
dc.contributor.authorKeçeci, Emin Faruk
dc.contributor.authorKapıcıoğlu, Mehmet
dc.contributor.authorAralaşmak, Ayşe
dc.contributor.authorTezgel, Okan
dc.contributor.authorBaşaran, Murat Alper
dc.contributor.authorYıldız, Fatih
dc.contributor.authorBilsel, Kerem
dc.date.accessioned2022-09-12T10:27:11Z
dc.date.available2022-09-12T10:27:11Z
dc.date.issued2022en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12868/1532
dc.identifier.urihttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10225536221079432
dc.description.abstractAbstract Introduction: Incorrect positioning is one of the main factors for glenoid component loosening in reverse shoulder arthroplasty and component placement can be challenging. This study aimed to assess whether Patient-Specific Instrumentation (PSI) provides better guide pin positioning accuracy and is superior to standard guided and freehand instrumentation methods in cases of glenoid bone deformity. Materials and Methods: Based on the Walch classification, five different scapula types were acquired by computed tomography (CT). For each type, two different surgeons placed a guide pin into the scapula using three different methods: freehand method, conventional non-patient-specific guide, and PSI guide. Each method was repeated five times by both surgeons. In these experiments, a total of 150 samples of scapula models were used (5 × 2 × 3 × 5 = 150). Post-operative CT scans of the samples with the guide pin were digitally assessed and the accuracy of the pin placement was determined by comparison to the preoperative planning on a three-dimensional (3D) model. Results: The PSI method showed accuracies to the preoperative plan of 2.68 (SD 2.10) degrees for version angle (p < .05), 2.59 (SD 2.68) degrees for inclination angle (p < .05), and 1.55 (SD 1.26) mm for entry point offset (p < .05). The mean and standard deviation errors compared to planned values of version angle, inclination angle, and entry point offset were statistically significant for the PSI method for the type C defected glenoid and non-arthritic glenoid. Conclusion: Using the PSI guide created by an image processing software tool for guide pin positioning showed advantages in glenoid component positioning over other methods, for defected and intact glenoid types, but correlation with clinical outcomes should be examined.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.1177/10225536221079432en_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectReverse shoulder arthroplastyen_US
dc.subjectpatient-specific guidesen_US
dc.subjectpreoperative planningen_US
dc.subjectguide pin positioningen_US
dc.subjectimage processingen_US
dc.titleThree dimensional patient-specific guides for guide pin positioning in reverse shoulder arthroplasty: An experimental study on different glenoid typesen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.contributor.departmentALKÜ, Fakülteler, Rafet Kayış Mühendislik Fakültesi, Endüstri Mühendisliği Bölümüen_US
dc.identifier.volume30en_US
dc.identifier.issue1en_US
dc.identifier.startpage1en_US
dc.identifier.endpage11en_US
dc.relation.journalJournal of Orthopaedic Surgeryen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

Thumbnail

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster