Aims. This study aimed to answer the following questions: do 3D-printed models lead to a more accurate recognition of the pattern of complex fractures of the elbow?; do 3D-printed models lead to a more reliable recognition of the pattern of these injuries?; and do junior surgeons benefit more from 3D-printed models than senior surgeons?. Methods. A total of 15 orthopaedic trauma surgeons (seven juniors, eight seniors) evaluated 20 complex elbow fractures for their overall pattern (i.e. varus posterior medial rotational injury, terrible triad injury, radial head fracture with posterolateral dislocation, anterior (trans-)olecranon fracture-dislocation, posterior (trans-)olecranon fracture-dislocation) and their specific characteristics. First, fractures were assessed based on radiographs and 2D and 3D CT scans; and in a subsequent round, one month later, with additional 3D-printed models. Diagnostic accuracy (acc) and inter-surgeon reliability (κ) were determined for each assessment. Results. Accuracy significantly improved with 3D-printed models for the whole group on pattern recognition (acc. 2D/3D. = 0.62 vs acc. 3Dprint. = 0.69; Δacc = 0.07 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.00 to 0.14); p = 0.025). A significant improvement was also seen in reliability for pattern recognition with the additional 3D-printed models (κ. 2D/3D. = 0.41 (moderate) vs κ. 3Dprint. = 0.59 (moderate); Δκ = 0.18 (95% CI 0.14 to 0.22); p ≤ 0.001). Accuracy was comparable between junior and senior surgeons with the 3D-printed model (acc. junior. = 0.70 vs acc. senior. = 0.68; Δacc = -0.02 (95% CI -0.17 to 0.13); p = 0.904). Reliability was also comparable between junior and senior surgeons without the 3D-printed model (κ. junior. = 0.39 (fair) vs κ. senior. = 0.43 (moderate); Δκ = 0.03 (95% CI -0.03 to 0.10); p = 0.318). However, junior surgeons showed greater improvement regarding reliability than seniors with 3D-printed models (κ. junior. = 0.65 (substantial) vs κ. senior. = 0.54 (moderate); Δκ = 0.11 (95% CI 0.04 to 0.18); p = 0.002). Conclusion. The use of 3D-printed models significantly improved the accuracy and reliability of recognizing the pattern of complex fractures of the elbow. However, the current long printing time and non-reusable materials could limit the usefulness of 3D-printed models in clinical practice. They could be suitable as a reusable tool for teaching residents. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(1):56–63

Aims. Patient-specific glenoid guides (PSGs) claim an improvement in accuracy and reproducibility of the positioning of components in total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). The results have not yet been confirmed in a prospective clinical trial. Our aim was to assess whether the use of PSGs in patients with osteoarthritis of the shoulder would allow accurate and reliable implantation of the glenoid component. Patients and Methods. A total of 17 patients (three men and 14 women) with a mean age of 71 years (53 to 81) awaiting TSA were enrolled in the study. Pre- and post-operative version and inclination of the glenoid were measured on CT scans, using 3D planning automatic software. During surgery, a congruent 3D-printed PSG was applied onto the glenoid surface, thus determining the entry point and orientation of the central guide wire used for reaming the glenoid and the introduction of the component. Manual segmentation was performed on post-operative CT scans to compare the planned and the actual position of the entry point (mm) and orientation of the component (°). Results. The mean error in the accuracy of the entry point was -0.1 mm (standard deviation (. sd. ) 1.4) in the horizontal plane, and 0.8 mm (. sd. 1.3) in the vertical plane. The mean error in the orientation of the glenoid component was 3.4° (. sd. 5.1°) for version and 1.8° (. sd. 5.3°) for inclination. Conclusion. Pre-operative planning with automatic software and the use of PSGs provides accurate and reproducible positioning and orientation of the glenoid component in anatomical TSA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1080–5