Computer assisted LISS plate placement: an in vitro study

Figures & data

Figure 1. The model femur covered with simulated soft tissue.

Figure 2. AP and lateral views were acquired with the tracking marker arrays in place.

Figure 3. The LISS plate superimposed on the fluoroscopic image of the model femur.

Table I.  Comparison of results for conventional and navigated procedures.

	Mean	Range/SD	Probability	Confidence interval
Time: conventional (min)	08:42	04:22–17:37 / 3.5
Time: navigated (min)	16:31	09:36–25:24 / 4.7	p = 0.00	5:18–11:30
No. of fluoroguide shots: conventional	9.8	5–26 / 4.9
No. of fluoroguide shots: navigated	7.0	4–15 / 2.8	p = 0.05	0.01–5.7
Max. distance to condyle: conventional	2.69	1–5 / 1.3
Max. distance to condyle: navigated	2.44	1–5 / 1.4	p = 0.60	0.70–1.2
Max. distance to diaphysis: conventional	3.38	1–9 / 2.19
Max. distance to diaphysis: navigated	6.44	2–12 / 3.20	p = 0.04	1.1–5.0