Sven Yves Vetter

Dr. Sven Yves Vetter

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

12Years (2015-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
24 July 2019 in Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
NBNils Beisemann
Nils Beisemann
HKHolger Keil
Holger Keil
Benedict SwartmanBenedict Swartman
Benedict Swartman
MSMarc Schnetzke
Marc Schnetzke
JFJochen Franke
Jochen Franke
SVSven Yves Vetter
Sven Yves Vetter
The aim of this study was to evaluate the intraoperative revision rate and reasons for revision following 3D imaging in the management of dislocated articular tibial plateau fractures based on a large patient sample. This retrospective cohort study included all patients who underwent open reduction and internal fixation due type B or C tibial plateau fracture according to the AO/OTA classification between August 2001 and December 2017 using intraoperative cone beam CT (3D imaging) for the analysis of fracture reduction and implant placement. The findings of the 3D scan were categorized regarding the amount and type of revision. Furthermore, demographic data was examined. Five hundred and fifty-nine consecutive fractures were included in the study. Evaluation of the image data records revealed an intraoperative revision due to the usage of 3D imaging in 148 out of 559 cases (26.5%). The most common reasons for an intraoperative revision were insufficient fracture reduction (114 cases) and screw length (21 cases). This study reveals indications for a limited analysis of fracture reduction and implant placement during the operative treatment of dislocated articular tibial plateau fractures using conventional fluoroscopy. In view of the high revision rate during open reduction and internal fixation of tibial plateau fractures due to 3D imaging the usage of intraoperative cone beam, CT may be considered. If this is not possible, a postoperative computed tomography may therefore be reasonable.

10 April 2018 in Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
HKHolger Keil
Holger Keil
NBNils Beisemann
Nils Beisemann
MSMarc Schnetzke
Marc Schnetzke
SVSven Yves Vetter
Sven Yves Vetter
Benedict SwartmanBenedict Swartman
Benedict Swartman
JFJochen Franke
Jochen Franke
In acetabular fractures, the assessment of reduction and implant placement has limitations in conventional 2D intraoperative imaging. 3D imaging offers the opportunity to acquire CT-like images and thus to improve the results. However, clinical experience shows that even 3D imaging has limitations, especially regarding artifacts when implants are placed. The purpose of this study was to assess the difference between intraoperative 3D imaging and postoperative CT regarding reduction and implant placement. Twenty consecutive cases of acetabular fractures were selected with a complete set of intraoperative 3D imaging and postoperative CT data. The largest detectable step and the largest detectable gap were measured in all three standard planes. These values were compared between the 3D data sets and CT data sets. Additionally, possible correlations between the possible confounders age and BMI and the difference between 3D and CT values were tested. The mean difference of largest visible step between the 3D imaging and CT scan was 2.0 ± 1.8 mm (0.0–5.8, p = 0.02) in the axial, 1.3 ± 1.4 mm (0.0–3.7, p = 0.15) in the sagittal and 1.9 ± 2.4 mm (0.0–7.4, p = 0.22) in the coronal views. The mean difference of largest visible gap between the 3D imaging and CT scan was 3.1 ± 3.6 mm (0.0–14.1, p = 0.03) in the axial, 4.6 ± 2.7 mm (1.2–8.7, p = 0.001) in the sagittal and 3.5 ± 4.0 mm (0.0–15.4, p = 0.06) in the coronal views. A positive correlation between the age and the difference in gap measurements in the sagittal view was shown (rho = 0.556, p = 0.011). Intraoperative 3D imaging is a valuable adjunct in assessing reduction and implant placement in acetabular fractures but has limitations due to artifacts caused by implant material. This can lead to missed malreduction and impairment of clinical outcome, so postoperative CT should be considered in these cases.

11 July 2023 in Brain and Spine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
EMEric Mandelka
Eric Mandelka
JGJula Gierse
Jula Gierse
FZFelix Zimmermann
Felix Zimmermann
Paul Alfred GrütznerPaul Alfred Grützner
Paul Alfred Grützner
JFJochen Franke
Jochen Franke
SVSven Yves Vetter
Sven Yves Vetter
There is ample evidence that higher accuracy can be achieved in thoracolumbar pedicle screw placement by using spinal navigation. Still, to date, the evidence regarding the influence of the use of navigation on the screw diameter to pedicle width ratio remains limited. The aim of this study was to investigate the implications of navigation in thoracolumbar pedicle screw placement not only on screw accuracy, but on the screw diameter to pedicle width ratio as well. In this single-center single-surgeon study, 45 Patients undergoing navigated thoracolumbar pedicle screw placement were prospectively included. The results were compared with a matched comparison group of patients in which screw placement was performed under fluoroscopic guidance. The screw accuracy and the screw diameter to pedicle width ratio of every screw were compared between the groups. Screw accuracy was significantly higher in the navigation group compared to the fluoroscopic guidance group, alongside with a significant increase of the screw diameter to pedicle width ratio by approximately 10%. In addition, both the intraoperative radiation dose and the operating time tended to be lower in the study group. This study was able to show that navigated thoracolumbar pedicle screw placement not only increases the accuracy of screw placement but also facilitates the selection of the adequate screw sizes, which according to the literature has positive effects on fixation strength. Meanwhile, the use of navigation did not negatively affect the time needed for surgery or the patient's intraoperative exposure to radiation.

18 March 2016 in BMC Medical Imaging
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MSMarc Schnetzke
Marc Schnetzke
JFJulia Fuchs
Julia Fuchs
SVSven Yves Vetter
Sven Yves Vetter
NBNils Beisemann
Nils Beisemann
HKHolger Keil
Holger Keil
JFJochen Franke
Jochen Franke
Three-dimensional (3D) imaging with a mobile C-arm has proven to be a valuable intraoperative tool in trauma surgery. However, little data is available concerning its use in the treatment of elbow fractures. The aim of the current study was to determine the intraoperative findings and consequences of 3D imaging in the treatment of elbow fractures. Between 2001 and 2015, prospectively collected data of 36 patients who underwent intraoperative 3D imaging during elbow surgery were recorded. The findings and consequences of the intraoperative 3D scans were analyzed in a retrospective chart review. For clinical evaluation the analysis included the patients’ medical history, the injury pattern of the affected elbow and concomitant injuries. Intraoperative and postoperative complications and revision surgeries were evaluated as well. In 6 patients (16.7 %) analysis of the intraoperative 3D scan led to an immediate revision due to the detection of intra-articular screw placement (n = 3, 8.3 %) and remaining intra-articular step of >2 mm (n = 3, 8.3 %). In all of these patients, correct implant positioning and anatomical reduction could be achieved after immediate intraoperative revision, which was verified by a repeated intraoperative 3D scan. None of the 36 patients needed surgical revision based on postoperative radiological examinations due to secondary dislocation, wrong implant placement or remaining steps in the articular surface. Intraoperative 3D imaging offers additional information about fracture reduction and implant positioning in the treatment of elbow fractures compared to conventional intraoperative 2D imaging. It may therefore reduce the need for revision surgery. The value of intraoperative 3D imaging for clinical outcomes still needs to be assessed.

6 July 2020 in Journal of Digital Imaging
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
MPMaxim Privalov
Maxim Privalov
MMMarcus Mohr
Marcus Mohr
BSBenedict Swartman
Benedict Swartman
NBNils Beisemann
Nils Beisemann
HKHolger Keil
Holger Keil
SVSven Yves Vetter
Sven Yves Vetter

11 March 2020 in Scientific Reports
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MLM. Luxenhofer
M. Luxenhofer
NBN. Beisemann
N. Beisemann
MSMarc Schnetzke
Marc Schnetzke
SVSven Yves Vetter
Sven Yves Vetter
PGP. A. Grützner
P. A. Grützner
HKH. Keil
H. Keil
Anatomic reconstruction of articular fractures is one of the critical factors in later achieving good functional outcome. Intraoperative 3D imaging has been shown to offer better evaluation and therefore can significantly improve the results. The purpose of this study was to assess the difference between intraoperative three-dimensional fluoroscopy (3D) and intraoperative computed tomography (iCT) imaging regarding fracture reduction, implant placement and articular impressions in a distal humeral fracture model. AO type 13-B2 fracture pattern were created in upper extremity cadaver specimens. Articular step-offs, intra-articular screw placement and intraarticular impressions of different degrees of severity were created. All specimens had imaging performed. For each articular pattern 3D fluoroscopy in standard (3Ds) and high quality (3Dh) were performed (Arcadis Orbic, Siemens, Germany) as well as an intraoperative CT scan (iCT, Airo, Brainlab, Germany). Three observers evaluated all imaging studies regarding subjective and objective parameters. iCT is more precise than 3D fluoroscopic imaging for detection of articular impressions. Articular step-offs and intraarticular screw placement are similar for iCT and 3D. Subjective imaging quality is the highest for iCT and lowest for 3Ds. Intraoperative CT may be particularly useful in assessing articular impressions and providing a good subjective image quality for the surgeon.