简介：AbstractBackground:Surgical treatment of both-column acetabular fractures is challenging because of the complex acetabular fracture patterns and the curved surface of the acetabulum. Seldom study has compared the application of three-dimensional (3D) printing technology and traditional methods of contouring plates intra-operatively for the surgical treatment of both-column acetabular fractures. We presented the use of both 3D printing technology and a virtual simulation in pre-operative planning for both-column acetabular fractures. We hypothesized that 3D printing technology will assist orthopedic surgeons in shortening the surgical time and improving the clinical outcomes.Methods:Forty patients with both-column acetabular fractures were recruited in the randomized prospective case-control study from September 2013 to September 2017 for this prospective study (No. ChiCTR1900028230). We allocated the patients to two groups using block randomization (3D printing group, n = 20; conventional method group, n = 20). For the 3D printing group, 1:1 scaled pelvic models were created using 3D printing, and the plates were pre-contoured according to the pelvic models. The plates for the conventional method group were contoured during the operation without 3D printed pelvic models. The operation time, instrumentation time, time of intra-operative fluoroscopy, blood loss, number of times the approach was performed, blood transfusion, post-operative fracture reduction quality, hip joint function, and complications were recorded and compared between the two groups.Results:The operation and instrumentation times in the 3D printing group were significantly shorter (130.8 ± 29.2 min, t = －7.5, P < 0.001 and 32.1 ± 9.5 min, t = －6.5, P < 0.001, respectively) than those in the conventional method group. The amount of blood loss and blood transfusion in the 3D printing group were significantly lower (500 [400, 800] mL, Mann-Whitney U= 74.5, P < 0.001 and 0 [0,400] mL, Mann-Whitney U = 59.5, P < 0.001, respectively) than those in the conventional method group. The number of the approach performed in the 3D printing group was significantly smaller than that in the conventional method group (pararectus + Kocher-Langenbeck [K-L] approach rate: 35% vs. 85%; x2 = 10.4, P < 0.05). The time of intra-operative fluoroscopy in the 3D printing group was significantly shorter than that in the conventional method group (4.2 ± 1.8 vs. 7.7 ± 2.6 s; t = －5.0, P < 0.001). The post-operative fracture reduction quality in the 3D printing group was significantly better than that in the conventional method group (good reduction rate: 80% vs. 30%; x2 = 10.1, P < 0.05). The hip joint function (based on the Harris score 1 year after the operation) in the 3D printing group was significantly better than that in the conventional method group (excellent/good rate: 75% vs. 30%; x2 = 8.1, P < 0.05). The complication was similar in both groups (5.0% vs. 25%; x2 = 3.1, P = 0.182).Conclusions:The use of a pre-operative virtual simulation and 3D printing technology is a more effective method for treating bothcolumn acetabular fractures. This method can shorten the operation and instrumentation times, reduce blood loss, blood transfusion and the time of intra-operative fluoroscopy, and improve the post-operative fracture reduction quality.Clinical trail registration:No.ChiCTR1900028230; http://www.chictr.org.cn

简介：摘要：现在3D打印技术上缺乏专业人才，但是3D打印技术相对来说较为成熟，在多个行业如家电，汽车，工程机械等方面均有应用。3D打印技术最先在美国开始流行，近几年在中国也逐渐开始流行起来，但是，对于传统手艺制作糖人是一种中国传统手工技艺，制作者挑一个担子，一头是加热用的炉具，另一头是糖料和工具，并且制造糖人是一门急需经验的手艺，新手制作难度大，成品率低，然而利用3D打印目前技术与特定的挤出头结合，从而实现糖人制品的打印。

简介：AbstractPurpose:This meta-analysis compared the clinical outcome of three-dimensional (3D) printing combined with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) to traditional ORIF in the treatment of acetabular fractures.Methods:We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, VIP database, CNKI, and Wanfang data-base with keywords "acetabular fracture" , "3D printing" , "three-dimensional printing" , "open reduction and internal fixation" , "Acetabulum" , "Acetabula" from January 2000 to March 2020. Two reviewers independently selected articles, extracted data, assessed the quality evidence and risk bias of included trials using the Cochrane Collaboration’ s tools and/or Newcastle-Ottawa scale. When the two analysts had different opinions, they would ask the third analyst for opinion. Randomized controlled trials or retrospective comparative studies of 3D printing combined with ORIF (3D printing group) versus traditional ORIF (conventional group) in the treatment of acetabular fractures were selected. The data of operation time, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative fluoroscopy times, incidence of complications, excellent and good rate of Matta score for reduction, and excellent and good rate of hip function score were extracted. Stata14.0 statistical software was used for data analysis.Results:Altogether 9 articles were selected, including 5 randomized controlled trials and 4 retrospective studies. A total of 467 patients were analyzed, 250 in the conventional group, and 217 in the 3D printing group. The operation time in the 3D printing group was less than that in the conventional group and the difference was statistically significant (standardized mean difference (SMD) =-1.19, 95% CI:-1.55 to-0.82, p < 0.05). The intraoperative bleeding volume of the 3D printing group was significantly lower than that of the conventional group (SMD=-1.08, 95% CI:-1.65 to-0.51, p < 0.05). The fluoroscopy times were less in the 3D printing group than in the conventional group and the difference was statistically significant (SMD=-1.64, 95% CI:-2.35 to-0.93, p < 0.05). The total incidence of complications in the 3D printing group was significantly lower than that in the conventional group (OR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.24-0.79, p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the excellent and good rate of Matta score for reduction between the two groups (OR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.34-1.06, p > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the excellent and good rate of hip function score at the end of postoperative follow-up between the two groups (OR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.46-1.56, p > 0.05), but the follow-up time varies from 6 months to 40 months.Conclusion:Compared with traditional ORIF, 3D printing combined with ORIF has certain advantages in terms that 3D printing not only helps surgeons to understand acetabular fractures more intuitively, but also effectively reduces operation time, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative fluoroscopy times, and postoperative complications. However, there were no significant differences in the excellent and good rate of Matta score for reduction and the excellent and good rate of hip function score at the end of follow-up.