Accurate reconstructions of pelvic defects and discontinuities using statistical shape models

References

• Amenabar T, Rahman WA, Hetaimish BM, Kuzyk PR, Safir OA, Gross AE. 2016. Promising mid-term results with a cup-cage construct for large acetabular defects and pelvic discontinuity. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 474(2):408–414.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baghdadi YMK, Larson AN, Sierra RJ. 2013. Restoration of the hip center during THA performed for protrusio acetabuli is associated with better implant survival. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 471(10):3251–3259.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barlow BT, Oi KK, Lee Y, Carli AV, Choi DS, Bostrom MP. 2016. Outcomes of custom flange acetabular components in revision total hip arthroplasty and predictors of failure. J Arthroplasty. 31(5):1057–1064.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berasi CC, Berend KR, Adams JB, Ruh EL, Lombardi AV. 2015. Are custom triflange acetabular components effective for reconstruction of catastrophic bone loss? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 473(2):528–535.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berry DJ, Lewallen DG, Hanssen AD, Cabanela ME. 1999. Pelvic discontinuity in revision total hip arthroplasty*. JBJS. 81(12):1692.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bicanic G, Delimar D, Delimar M, Pecina M. 2009. Influence of the acetabular cup position on hip load during arthroplasty in hip dysplasia. Int Orthop. 33(2):397–402.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blumenfeld TJ. 2012. Implant choices, technique, and results in revision acetabular surgery: a review. Hip Int. 22(3):235–247.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blumenfeld TJ. 2016. CORR insights(®): custom acetabular cages offer stable fixation and improved hip scores for revision THA with severe bone defects. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 474(3):741–743.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buckup J, Salinas EA, Valle AGD, Boettner F. 2013. Treatment of large acetabular defects: a surgical technique utilizing impaction grafting into a metallic mesh. HSS J. 9(3):242–246.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chintalapani G, Ellingsen LM, Sadowsky O, Prince JL, Taylor RH. 2007. Statistical atlases of bone anatomy: construction, iterative improvement and validation. In: International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; p. 499–506.
   Google Scholar
• Christie MJ, Barrington SA, Brinson MF, Ruhling ME, DeBoer DK. 2001. Bridging massive acetabular defects with the triflange cup: 2-to 9-year results. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 393:216–227.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D’antonio JA, Capello WN, Borden LS, Bargar WL, Bierbaum BF, Boettcher WG, Steinberg ME, Stulberg SD, Wedge JH. 1989. Classification and management of acetabular abnormalities in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Related Res®. 243:126.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davies RH. 2002. Learning shape: optimal models for analysing natural variability. Manchester: University of Manchester.
   Google Scholar
• De Martino I, Strigelli V, Cacciola G, Gu A, Bostrom MP, Sculco PK. 2019. Survivorship and clinical outcomes of custom triflange acetabular components in revision total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review. J Arthroplasty. 34(10):2511–2518.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeBoer DK, Christie MJ, Brinson MF, Morrison JC. 2007. Revision total hip arthroplasty for pelvic discontinuity. JBJS. 89(4):835–840.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dou Q, Yu L, Chen H, Jin Y, Yang X, Qin J, Heng P-A. 2017. 3D deeply supervised network for automated segmentation of volumetric medical images. Med Image Anal. 41:40–54.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gelaude F, Clijmans T, Broos PL, Lauwers B, Vander Sloten J. 2007. Computer-aided planning of reconstructive surgery of the innominate bone: automated correction proposals. Comput Aided Surg. 12(5):286–294.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hasenauer MD, Paprosky WG, Sheth NP. 2018. Treatment options for chronic pelvic discontinuity. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 9(1):58–62.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hettich G, Schierjott RA, Ramm H, Graichen H, Jansson V, Rudert M, Traina F, Grupp TM. 2019. Method for quantitative assessment of acetabular bone defects. J Orthop Res. 37(1):181–189.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holt GE, Dennis DA. 2004. Use of custom triflanged acetabular components in revision total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 429:209–214.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Karachalios TMD, Hartofilakidis GMD, Zacharakis NMD, Tsekoura M. 1993. A 12- to 18-year radiographic follow-up study of charnley low-friction arthroplasty: the role of the center of rotation. Clin Orthop Related Res. 296:140–147.
   Google Scholar
• Krol Z, Skadlubowicz P, Hefti F, Krieg AH. 2013. Virtual reconstruction of pelvic tumor defects based on a gender-specific statistical shape model. Comput Aided Surg. 18(5–6):142–153.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lüthi M, Gerig T, Jud C, Vetter T. 2018. Gaussian process morphable models. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 40(8):1860–1873.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin JR, Barrett I, Sierra RJ, Lewallen DG, Berry DJ. 2016. Bilateral pelvic discontinuity: a unique condition characterized by high failure rates of current treatment. Arthroplast Today. 2(4):183–186.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Myncke I, van Schaik D, Scheerlinck T. 2017. Custom-made triflanged acetabular components in the treatment of major acetabular defects. Short-term results and clinical experience. Acta Orthop Belg. 83(3):341–350.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paprosky WG, O’Rourke M, Sporer SM. 2005. The treatment of acetabular bone defects with an associated pelvic discontinuity. Clin Orthop Related Res®. 441:216.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paprosky WG, Perona PG, Lawrence JM. 1994. Acetabular defect classification and surgical reconstruction in revision arthroplasty. A 6-year follow-up evaluationJ Arthroplasty. 9(1):33–44.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Paul L, Docquier P-L, Cartiaux O, Cornu O, Delloye C, Banse X. 2010. Selection of massive bone allografts using shape-matching 3-dimensional registration. Acta Orthop. 81(2):250–255.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plessers K, Verhaegen F, Van Dijck C, Wirix-Speetjens R, Debeer P, Jonkers I, Vander Sloten J. 2020. Automated quantification of glenoid bone defects using 3-dimensional measurements. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 29(5):1050–1058.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schönborn S, Egger B, Morel-Forster A, Vetter T. 2017. Markov Chain Monte Carlo for automated face image analysis. Int J Comput Vis. 123(2):160–183.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sporer SM, Bottros JJ, Hulst JB, Kancherla VK, Moric M, Paprosky WG. 2012. Acetabular distraction: an alternative for severe defects with chronic pelvic discontinuity? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 470(11):3156–3163.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sporer SM. 2011. How to do a revision total hip arthroplasty: revision of the acetabulum. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 93(14):1359–1366.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vancleef S, Herteleer M, Carette Y, Herijgers P, Duflou JR, Nijs S, Vander Sloten J. 2019. Why off-the-shelf clavicle plates rarely fit: anatomic analysis of the clavicle through statistical shape modeling. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 28(4):631–638.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vanden Berghe P, Demol J, Gelaude F, Vander Sloten J. 2017. Virtual anatomical reconstruction of large acetabular bone defects using a statistical shape model. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng. 20(6):577–586.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Villanueva M, Rios-Luna A, Pereiro De Lamo J, Fahandez-Saddi H, Böstrom M. 2008. A review of the treatment of pelvic discontinuity. HSS J. 4(2):128–137.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• White JD, Ortega-Castrillón A, Matthews H, Zaidi AA, Ekrami O, Snyders J, Fan Y, Penington T, Van Dongen S, Shriver MD, et al. 2019. MeshMonk: open-source large-scale intensive 3D phenotyping. Sci Rep. 9(1):1–11.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wyatt MC. 2015. Custom 3D-printed acetabular implants in hip surgery-innovative breakthrough or expensive bespoke upgrade? Hip Int. 25(4):375–379.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar