RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The agreement for the treatment of proximal humerus fractures is low. Interpretation of exams used for diagnosis can be directly associated with this limitation. This study proposes to compare the agreement between experts and residents in orthopedics for treatment indication of proximal humerus fractures, utilizing 3D-models, holography (augmented reality), x-rays, and tomography as diagnostic methods. METHODS: Twenty orthopedists (ten experts in shoulder and elbow surgery and ten experts in traumatology) and thirty resident physicians in orthopedics evaluated nine fractures of the proximal humerus, randomly distributed as x-rays, tomography, 3D-models and holography, using the Neer and AO / OTA Classifications. After, we evaluated the interobserver agreement between treatment options (conservative, osteosynthesis and arthroplasty) and whether the experience of the evaluators interfered with the results. RESULTS: The interobserver agreement analysis showed the following kappa-values: κ = 0.362 and κ = 0.306 for experts and residents (3D-models); κ = 0.240 and κ = 0.221 (X-ray); κ = 0.233 and κ = 0.123 (Tomography) and κ = 0.321 and κ = 0.160 (Holography), for experts and residents respectively. Moreover, residents and specialists were discordant in the treatment indication using Tomography as a diagnostic method (p = 0.003). The same was not seen for the other diagnostic methods (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Three-dimensional models showed, overall, the highest interobserver agreement (experts versus residents in orthopedics) for the choice of treatment of proximal humerus fractures compared to X-ray, Tomography, and Holography. Agreement in the choice of treatment among experts that used Tomography and Holography as diagnostic methods were two times higher compared to residents. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered in Brazil Platform under no. CAAE 12273519.7.0000.5505.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Proximal humerus fractures are frequent, and several studies show low diagnostic agreement among the observers, as well as an inaccurate classification of these lesions. The divergences are generally correlated with the experience of the surgeons as well as the diagnostic methods used. This paper challenges these problems including alternative diagnostic methods such as 3D models and augmented reality (holography) and including the observers' period of medical experience as a factor. METHODS: Twenty orthopedists (ten experts in shoulder surgery and ten experts in traumatology) and thirty resident physicians in orthopedics classified nine proximal humerus fractures randomly distributed as x-ray, tomographies, 3D models and holography, using AO/ASIF and Neer's classification. In the end, we evaluated the intra- and inter-observer agreement between diagnostic methods and whether the experience of the observers interfered in the evaluations and the classifications used. RESULTS: We found overall kappa coefficients ranging from 0.241 (fair) to 0.624 (substantial) between the two classifications (AO / ASIF and Neer), concerning the diagnostic methods used. We identified image modality differences (p = 0.017), where 3D models presented an average kappa coefficient value superior to that of tomographies. There were no differences between kappa scores for x-ray and holography compared to the others. The kappa scores for AO / ASIF classification and Neer classification and subdivided by observer period of experience showed no differences concerning the diagnostic method used. CONCLUSIONS: 3D models can substantially improve diagnostic agreement for proximal humerus fractures evaluation among experts or resident physicians. The holography showed good agreement between the experts and can be a similar option to x-ray and tomography in the evaluation and classification of these fractures. The observers' period of experience did not improve the diagnostic agreement between the image modalities studied. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered in the Brazil Platform under no. CAAE 88912318.1.0000.5487.
RESUMEN
Procedimentos cirúrgicos de reconstrução do ligamento cruzado anterior com duplo feixe dos tendões dos músculos semitendíneo e grácil têm sido descritos na última década. A maioria das técnicas descritas utiliza o dobro de material de síntese empregado na reconstrução com feixe único. Relatamos uma técnica original para a reconstrução do ligamento cruzado anterior com duplo feixe, na qual mantemos as inserções tibiais dos tendões dos músculos semitendíneo e grácil e realizamos dois túneis tibiais e dois túneis femorais. Os túneis femorais são realizados "de fora para dentro" e a fixação do enxerto é realizada somente com dois parafusos de interferência.
Surgical procedures for double-bundle reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligament, which currently use semitendinous and gracilis tendon grafts, have been described in the last decade. Most of the techniques utilize twice the hardware used in single-bundle reconstructions. We report an original anterior cruciate ligament double-bundle reconstruction technique using semitendinous and gracilis tendon grafts, maintaining their tibial bone insertions with two tibial and two femoral tunnels. A simplified and precise outside-in femoral drilling technique is utilized, and the graft fixation is made utilizing only two interference screws.
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Traumatismos de la Rodilla , Ligamento Cruzado Anterior/cirugía , Traumatismos de la Rodilla/cirugía , Traumatismos de la Rodilla/terapiaRESUMEN
In this article, an original double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction technique is described. The procedure is developed using hamstring tendon grafts while maintaining tibial osseous insertion. Two tibial tunnels are drilled and a simplified and precise outside-in double tunnel femoral drilling technique is utilized. The graft fixation is made using only two interference screws.
