Methodical clinical measurement of knee deformity

Kumar Ma
{"title":"Methodical clinical measurement of knee deformity","authors":"Kumar Ma","doi":"10.31579/2641-0427/008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The recognition of the pattern and severity of deformity in knee osteoarthritis has important implications in its management and prognosis. A number of methods can be used to assess and measure the coronal and sagittal knee alignment: clinical deformity measuring device like a goniometer, standard knee radiographs, hip-knee-ankle (HKA) radiographs, computer navigation systems, magnetic resonance scan, computerized tomographic scan or simply a surgeon’s subjective measurement. Each of these methods has advantages and disadvantages. The aim of this study was to compare three methods of measurement: clinical measurement with a goniometer; HKA radiographs and computer navigation. This study included 54 patients with arthritic knees, who underwent total knee replacement with computer navigation. The deformity in both coronal and sagittal planes was measured using the three methods and the results compared using Bland Altman limits of agreement. The clinical measurement differed greatly from radiographic and computer navigation measurements. According to Bland Altman limits of agreement clinical measurements could be up to 10° away from the radiographic or computer navigated measurements in coronal plane. In the sagittal plane the clinical measurements could be up to 12° away compared to computer navigation measurements. A combination of these measurements methods should be taken into account when assessing the deformity of a knee especially in relation to posture and weight bearing status. The methodical clinical measurement of knee deformity as described in this paper gives too wide a margin of error and should not be relied upon in isolation.","PeriodicalId":394480,"journal":{"name":"Orthopaedics and Surgical Sports Medicine","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopaedics and Surgical Sports Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31579/2641-0427/008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The recognition of the pattern and severity of deformity in knee osteoarthritis has important implications in its management and prognosis. A number of methods can be used to assess and measure the coronal and sagittal knee alignment: clinical deformity measuring device like a goniometer, standard knee radiographs, hip-knee-ankle (HKA) radiographs, computer navigation systems, magnetic resonance scan, computerized tomographic scan or simply a surgeon’s subjective measurement. Each of these methods has advantages and disadvantages. The aim of this study was to compare three methods of measurement: clinical measurement with a goniometer; HKA radiographs and computer navigation. This study included 54 patients with arthritic knees, who underwent total knee replacement with computer navigation. The deformity in both coronal and sagittal planes was measured using the three methods and the results compared using Bland Altman limits of agreement. The clinical measurement differed greatly from radiographic and computer navigation measurements. According to Bland Altman limits of agreement clinical measurements could be up to 10° away from the radiographic or computer navigated measurements in coronal plane. In the sagittal plane the clinical measurements could be up to 12° away compared to computer navigation measurements. A combination of these measurements methods should be taken into account when assessing the deformity of a knee especially in relation to posture and weight bearing status. The methodical clinical measurement of knee deformity as described in this paper gives too wide a margin of error and should not be relied upon in isolation.
膝关节畸形的临床测量方法
识别膝关节骨关节炎畸形的模式和严重程度对其治疗和预后具有重要意义。许多方法可用于评估和测量膝关节冠状面和矢状面对齐:临床畸形测量设备,如测角仪,标准膝关节x线片,髋关节-膝关节-踝关节x线片,计算机导航系统,磁共振扫描,计算机断层扫描或仅仅是外科医生的主观测量。每种方法都有优点和缺点。本研究的目的是比较三种测量方法:临床测量与角计;香港航空x光片及电脑导航。本研究包括54例膝关节关节炎患者,他们接受了计算机导航的全膝关节置换术。使用三种方法测量冠状面和矢状面畸形,并使用Bland Altman一致性极限对结果进行比较。临床测量与x线摄影和计算机导航测量有很大不同。根据Bland Altman的说法,临床测量的一致限度可以与冠状面x线摄影或计算机导航测量相差10°。在矢状面,与计算机导航测量相比,临床测量距离可达12°。在评估膝关节畸形时,应综合考虑这些测量方法,特别是与姿势和负重状态有关的测量方法。系统的临床测量膝关节畸形,如本文所述,给出了太宽的误差范围,不应该孤立地依赖。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信