Analysis of the Accuracy of CAM-type Deformity Resection on a Low-cost Arthroscopic Simulator in a Training Scenario

Abstract

Objective To evaluate surgeons' performance in resecting CAM-type deformities using a realistic arthroscopic surgery simulator.

Methods An arthroscopic simulator was created using low-cost materials with the help of a GTMax Core A1 3D printer and the programs Invesalius and Meshmixer 2017, which were used to develop femoral head parts in ABS material, with the presence of a CAM-type deformity, to mimic a femoroacetabular impact situation. After the operations were performed by 16 surgeons, the femurs were compared to a previous model with deformity and another without, using Cloudcompare, and parameters such as the volumetric difference between the operated femurs, with and without deformity, the minimum and maximum distance between them, the percentage of the deformity resected, the estimated time for total resection of the deformity, as well as a qualitative analysis based on the images and graphs provided by the program representing the areas of the parts resected, were evaluated at the end.

Results The average resection speed was 34.66 mm³/min (SD = 46 mm³/min, max = 147.33; min = -2.66). The average resection rate was 26.2% (SD = 34.7%, max = 111; min = -2). Qualitative analysis showed hyporesection of deformities and sometimes hyperresection of nondeformed areas. The simulator was highly rated by the surgeons, with a tactile sensation very similar to real surgery, according to them.

Conclusion Arthroscopic simulators have proved very useful in training less experienced surgeons.

Keywords

arthroscopy - femoracetabular impingement - hip - simulation training

Work carried out at the Juiz de Fora School of Medical and Health Sciences/Suprema, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil.

Publication History

Received: 16 November 2023

Accepted: 15 January 2024

Article published online:
22 June 2024

• Referências

• 1 Maruthappu M, Gilbert BJ, El-Harasis MA. et al. The influence of volume and experience on individual surgical performance: a systematic review. Ann Surg 2015; 261 (04) 642-647
• 2 Van Heest A, Putnam M, Agel J, Shanedling J, McPherson S, Schmitz C. Assessment of technical skills of orthopaedic surgery residents performing open carpal tunnel release surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009; 91 (12) 2811-2817
• 3 Hui Y, Safir O, Dubrowski A, Carnahan H. What skills should simulation training in arthroscopy teach residents? A focus on resident input. Int J CARS 2013; 8 (06) 945-953
• 4 Keith K, Hansen DM, Johannessen MA. Perceived Value of a Skills Laboratory With Virtual Reality Simulator Training in Arthroscopy: A Survey of Orthopedic Surgery Residents. J Am Osteopath Assoc 2018; 118 (10) 667-672
• 5 Ganz R, Gill TJ, Gautier E, Ganz K, Krügel N, Berlemann U. Surgical dislocation of the adult hip a technique with full access to the femoral head and acetabulum without the risk of avascular necrosis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2001; 83 (08) 1119-1124
• 6 Philippon MJ, Schroder E Souza BG, Briggs KK, Briggs KK. Hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement in patients aged 50 years or older. Arthroscopy 2012; 28 (01) 59-65
• 7 Philippon MJ, Ejnisman L, Ellis HB, Briggs KK. Outcomes 2 to 5 years following hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement in the patient aged 11 to 16 years. Arthroscopy 2012; 28 (09) 1255-1261
• 8 Sardana V, Philippon MJ, de Sa D. et al. Revision Hip Arthroscopy Indications and Outcomes: A Systematic Review. Arthroscopy 2015; 31 (10) 2047-2055
• 9 Locks R, Bolia I, Utsunomiya H, Briggs K, Philippon MJ. Current concepts in revision hip arthroscopy. Hip Int 2018; 28 (04) 343-351
• 10 Mardones RM, Gonzalez C, Chen Q, Zobitz M, Kaufman KR, Trousdale RT. Surgical treatment of femoroacetabular impingement: evaluation of the effect of the size of the resection. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005; 87 (02) 273-279
• 11 Oba M, Kobayashi N, Inaba Y. et al. Mechanical Strength of the Proximal Femur After Arthroscopic Osteochondroplasty for Femoroacetabular Impingement: Finite Element Analysis and 3-Dimensional Image Analysis. Arthroscopy 2018; 34 (08) 2377-2386
• 12 Souza BG, Dani WS, Honda EK. et al. Do complications in hip arthroscopy change with experience?. Arthroscopy 2010; 26 (08) 1053-1057
• 13 Go CC, Kyin C, Maldonado DR, Domb BG. Surgeon Experience in Hip Arthroscopy Affects Surgical Time, Complication Rate, and Reoperation Rate: A Systematic Review on the Learning Curve. Arthroscopy 2020; 36 (12) 3092-3105
• 14 Cai B, Duan S, Yi J. et al. Training surgical skills on hip arthroscopy by simulation: a survey on surgeon's perspectives. Int J CARS 2022; 17 (10) 1813-1821
• 15 Hoppe DJ, de Sa D, Simunovic N. et al. The learning curve for hip arthroscopy: a systematic review. Arthroscopy 2014; 30 (03) 389-397
• 16 Arevalo A, Keller R, Szukics P. et al. Variation in Reported Learning Outcomes and Measurement Instruments in Hip Arthroscopy Simulation Training: A Systematic Review. Arthroscopy 2024; 40 (01) 176-186
• 17 Alter TD, Knapik DM, Guidetti M. et al. Three-Dimensional Quantification of Cam Resection Using MRI Bone Models: A Comparison of 2 Techniques. Orthop J Sports Med 2022; 10 (05) 23 259671221095417
• 18 Uhl JF, Sufianov A, Ruiz C. et al. The Use of 3D Printed Models for Surgical Simulation of Cranioplasty in Craniosynostosis as Training and Education. Brain Sci 2023; 13 (06) 894
• 19 Karam MD, Pedowitz RA, Natividad H, Murray J, Marsh JL. Current and future use of surgical skills training laboratories in orthopaedic resident education: a national survey. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2013; 95 (01) e4
• 20 Petropolis C, Kozan D, Sigurdson L. Accuracy of medical models made by consumer-grade fused deposition modelling printers. Plast Surg (Oakv) 2015; 23 (02) 91-94