Abstract
Introduction
The accuracy of hexapod circular external fixator deformity correction is contingent on the precision of radiographic analysis during the planning stage. The aim of this study was to compare the SMART TSF (Smith and Nephew, Memphis, Tennessee) in-suite radiographic analysis methods with the traditional manual deformity analysis methods in terms of accuracy of correction.
Materials and Methods
Sawbones models were used to simulate two commonly encountered clinical scenarios. Traditional manual radiographic analysis and digital SMART TSF analysis methods were used to correct the simulated deformities.
Results
The final outcomes of all six analysis methods across both simulated scenarios were satisfactory. Any differences in residual deformity between the analysis methods are unlikely to be clinically relevant. All three SMART TSF digital analyses were faster to complete than manual radiographic analyses.
Conclusions
With experience and a good understanding of the software, manual radiographic analysis can be extremely accurate and remains the gold standard for deformity analysis. In-suite SMART TSF radiographic analysis is fast and accurate to within clinically relevant parameters. Surgeons can with confidence trust the SMART TSF software to provide analysis and corrections that are clinically acceptable.
