Surgical Treatment for Posterior Dislocation of Hip Combined with Acetabular Fractures Using Preoperative Virtual Simulation and Three-Dimensional Printing Model-Assisted Precontoured Plate Fixation Techniques
Table 2
Demographic data.
Traditional method
3D printing method
P value
Group 1 (n=9)
Group 2 (n=7)
Age (year), M±SD
37.00±17.09
32.14±14.63
0.559
Sex, n (%)
0.213
Male
6 (66.7)
7 (100)
Female
3 (33.3)
0 (0)
BMI (kg/m2)
27.22±2.95
26.29±2.29
0.500
Fracture classification, n (%)
0.515
T-shaped + Pw
2 (22.2)
1 (14.3)
Pc + Pw
1 (11.2)
1 (14.3)
Pw
6 (66.7)
3 (42.9)
Transverse + Pw
0 (0)
2 (28.6)
Affected side, n (%)
1.000
Right
6 (66.7)
5 (71.4)
Left
3 (33.3)
2 (28.6)
Pw fragment size (%)
61.66±21.69
60.35±18.35
0.900
Dislocation, n (%)
9 (100)
7 (100)
n/a
Femoral head fracture, n (%)
0.633
no
5 (55.6)
5 (71.4)
yes
4 (44.4)
2 (28.6)
Number of PwSP, n (%)
1.000
0
1 (11.1)
1 (14.3)
1
6 (66.7)
4 (57.1)
2
2 (22.2)
2 (28.6)
Number of PwBP, n (%)
9 (100)
7 (100)
n/a
Number of PcP, n (%)
1.000
0
2 (22.2)
2 (28.6)
1
7 (77.8)
5 (71.4)
Ac, anterior column; AcP, anterior column plate; BMI, body mass index; M±SD, mean ± standard deviation; n, patient number; n/a, not applicable; Pc, posterior column; PcP, posterior column plate; Pw, posterior wall; PwBP, posterior wall buttress plate; PwSP, posterior wall spring plate. Independent test or chi-square test. Fisher’s exact test.
