Poster 238: Accuracy, Safety, and Cost of Patient-Specific Cutting Guides for Alignment-Correcting Osteotomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine the cost, accuracy of radiographic correction, and safety with respect to complication rates and fluoroscopic usage in patient-specific cutting guides (PSCG) osteotomies compared to an age- and body mass index (BMI)-matched group of controls using standard cutting guides (SCG). Methods: Patients were retrospectively reviewed between 2017 and 2022 at a single urban academic institution. Patients undergoing high tibial osteotomy (HTO) or distal femoral osteotomy (DFO) with PSCG (Bodycad 3d, Quebec, Canada) were identified. Traditional osteotomies were selected for the SCG group using propensity matching based on age, sex, BMI, osteotomy type. All procedures were performed by 1 of 2 fellowship-trained sports orthopaedic surgeons. Procedure time, fluoroscopy time, tourniquet time, and concomitant procedures were extracted from operative notes. Blinded, 2-reader hip-knee-ankle (HKA), posterior tibial slope (PTS) and mechanical axis deviation (MAD) measurements were performed on pre- and postoperative weightbearing radiographs for each procedure. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated to determine the reliability between the intended intraoperative correction of HKA and/or PTS the measured result on postoperative radiographs. A time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) analysis was performed to compare costs of PSCG versus SCG. Results: Forty-two patients were included in the final analysis. Each group was 47.6% female, with 11 HTOs and 10 DFOs performed in each group. Final HKA (2.7° vs 1.9°, p = 0.355), PTS (1.6° vs 2.6°, p = 0.794) and MAD (10.2 vs 5.8 mm, p = 0.214) did not significantly differ between SCG and PSCG groups (MAD seems higher for SCG. The ICC between the intended and measured HKA correction was 0.841 (good) in the PSCG group and 0.623 (moderate) in the SCG group. PSCG osteotomies averaged 18.5 minutes less (p = 0.392) and required 16.7 minutes less tourniquet time (p = 0.121). Fluoroscopy time was significantly lower in the PSCG group compared to SCG (99 vs 43 seconds, p < 0.001), as well as radiation dose (7.8 vs 2.9 mGy, p = 0.013). TDABC analysis demonstrated a base cost of $21,067 for PSCG and $23,896 for SCG. When the cost of the cutting guide and pre-operative imaging were included, PSCG was $2,829 more expensive than SCG. There was a lower, though non-statistically significant, rate of hinge fractures (9.5% vs 33.3%, p = 0.130) and return to the OR (4.8% vs 19.0%, p = 0.343) when comparing PSCG and SCG groups. Conclusions: Both traditionally guided osteotomies and PSCG-guided osteotomies accurately corrected lower extremity malalignment. Utilization of PSCG resulted in similar procedure times and cost. PSCG required less fluoroscopy and resulted in less radiation to conventional osteotomy and trended toward a decreased rate of postoperative complications.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".