Prediction of normal bone anatomy for the planning of corrective osteotomies of malunited forearm bones using a three-dimensional statistical shape model.

Corrective osteotomies of the forearm based on 3D computer simulation using contralateral anatomy as a reconstruction template is an approved method. Limitations are existing considerable differences between left and right forearms, and that a healthy contralateral anatomy is required. We evaluated if a computer model, not relying on the contralateral anatomy, may replace the current method by predicting the pre-traumatic healthy shape. A statistical shape model (SSM) was generated from a set of 59 CT scans of healthy forearms, encoding the normal anatomical variations. Three different configurations were simulated to predict the pre-traumatic shape with the SSM (cross-validation). In the first two, only the distal or proximal 50% of the radius were considered as pathological. In a third configuration, the entire radius was assumed to be pathological, only the ulna being intact. Corresponding experiments were performed with the ulna. Accuracy of the prediction was assessed by comparing the predicted bone with the healthy model. For the radius, mean rotation accuracy of the prediction between 2.9 +/- 2.2 degrees and 4.0 +/- 3.1 degrees in pronation/supination, 0.4 +/- 0.3 degrees and 0.6 +/- 0.5 degrees in flexion/extension, between 0.5 +/- 0.3 degrees and 0.5 +/- 0.4 degrees in radial-/ulnarduction. Mean translation accuracy along the same axes between 0.8 +/- 0.7 and 1.0 +/- 0.8mm, 0.5 +/- 0.4 and 0.6 +/- 0.4mm, 0.6 +/- 0.4 and 0.6 +/- 0.5mm, respectively. For the ulna, mean rotation accuracy between 2.4 +/- 1.9 degrees and 4.7 +/- 3.8 degrees in pronation/supination, 0.3 +/- 0.3 degrees and 0.8 +/- 0.6 degrees in flexion/extension, 0.3 +/- 0.2 degrees and 0.7 +/- 0.6 degrees in radial-/ulnarduction. Mean translation accuracy between 0.6 +/- 0.4mm and 1.3 +/- 0.9mm, 0.4 +/- 0.4mm and 0.7 +/- 0.5mm, 0.5 +/- 0.4mm and 0.8 +/- 0.6mm, respectively. This technique provided high accuracy, and may replace the current method, if validated in clinical studies. (c) 2017 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 35:2630-2636, 2017.