Comparative Analysis of Methods for Obtaining Median Nerve Cross-Sectional Area Using Ultrasound.

IF 1.8 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
HAND Pub Date : 2025-09-08 DOI:10.1177/15589447251366672
Chukwudi Onyeukwu, Rachit Saggar, Raymond M Toncich, Jenna Dvorksy, John R Fowler
{"title":"Comparative Analysis of Methods for Obtaining Median Nerve Cross-Sectional Area Using Ultrasound.","authors":"Chukwudi Onyeukwu, Rachit Saggar, Raymond M Toncich, Jenna Dvorksy, John R Fowler","doi":"10.1177/15589447251366672","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ultrasound measurement of median nerve cross-sectional area (CSA) is widely used in carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) diagnosis. This study compared 3 common measurement methods: A-B, Ellipse, and Trace to evaluate their reliability and accuracy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two observers (experienced hand surgeon and orthopedic surgery resident) measured median nerve CSA in 10 patients with suspected CTS. Each method was applied in standard and zoom-enhanced views: A-B method (measuring major/minor axes), Ellipse method (fitting ellipse to nerve boundaries), and Trace method (manually tracing nerve boundary). Measurements were compared to ImageJ software analysis as reference standard. Reliability and accuracy were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), Bland-Altman analysis, and standard detectable difference (SDD).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All methods showed high reliability (ICC: 0.940-0.994) but consistently underestimated CSA compared to ImageJ (12.15 ± 5.13 mm<sup>2</sup>). The Trace method showed smallest mean difference from ImageJ (-1.26 mm<sup>2</sup>), followed by A-B (-1.46 mm<sup>2</sup>) and Ellipse (-1.96 mm<sup>2</sup>). The Trace method demonstrated highest accuracy without zoom (85.5%) and lowest SDD (1.57 mm<sup>2</sup>). Interrater reliability was significantly higher in zoom condition for all methods, with Trace method showing highest interrater reliability in both zoom and nonzoom conditions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>All 3 ultrasound methods demonstrated high reliability in measuring median nerve CSA, with Trace method showing modest advantages in accuracy and precision. Zoom enhanced views improved interrater reliability but reduced measurement accuracy. Based on our findings, we recommend nonzoom Trace method for consistent longitudinal measurements, though maintaining proficiency in one selected method is more important. Further validation with larger studies is warranted.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level 2.</p>","PeriodicalId":12902,"journal":{"name":"HAND","volume":" ","pages":"15589447251366672"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12420643/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HAND","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15589447251366672","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Ultrasound measurement of median nerve cross-sectional area (CSA) is widely used in carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) diagnosis. This study compared 3 common measurement methods: A-B, Ellipse, and Trace to evaluate their reliability and accuracy.

Methods: Two observers (experienced hand surgeon and orthopedic surgery resident) measured median nerve CSA in 10 patients with suspected CTS. Each method was applied in standard and zoom-enhanced views: A-B method (measuring major/minor axes), Ellipse method (fitting ellipse to nerve boundaries), and Trace method (manually tracing nerve boundary). Measurements were compared to ImageJ software analysis as reference standard. Reliability and accuracy were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), Bland-Altman analysis, and standard detectable difference (SDD).

Results: All methods showed high reliability (ICC: 0.940-0.994) but consistently underestimated CSA compared to ImageJ (12.15 ± 5.13 mm2). The Trace method showed smallest mean difference from ImageJ (-1.26 mm2), followed by A-B (-1.46 mm2) and Ellipse (-1.96 mm2). The Trace method demonstrated highest accuracy without zoom (85.5%) and lowest SDD (1.57 mm2). Interrater reliability was significantly higher in zoom condition for all methods, with Trace method showing highest interrater reliability in both zoom and nonzoom conditions.

Conclusion: All 3 ultrasound methods demonstrated high reliability in measuring median nerve CSA, with Trace method showing modest advantages in accuracy and precision. Zoom enhanced views improved interrater reliability but reduced measurement accuracy. Based on our findings, we recommend nonzoom Trace method for consistent longitudinal measurements, though maintaining proficiency in one selected method is more important. Further validation with larger studies is warranted.

Level of evidence: Level 2.

超声获取正中神经横截面积方法的比较分析。
背景:超声测量正中神经横截面积(CSA)在腕管综合征(CTS)诊断中应用广泛。本研究比较了常用的3种测量方法:A-B、Ellipse和Trace,以评估它们的可靠性和准确性。方法:两名观察员(经验丰富的手外科医生和骨科住院医师)测量了10例疑似CTS患者的正中神经CSA。每种方法分别应用于标准视图和放大增强视图:A-B法(测量长/小轴)、Ellipse法(将椭圆拟合到神经边界)和Trace法(手动跟踪神经边界)。测量结果与ImageJ软件分析作为参考标准进行比较。采用类内相关系数(ICCs)、Bland-Altman分析和标准可检测差异(SDD)评估可靠性和准确性。结果:所有方法均具有较高的信度(ICC: 0.940 ~ 0.994),但与ImageJ相比,CSA普遍低估(12.15±5.13 mm2)。Trace法与ImageJ的平均差异最小(-1.26 mm2),其次是A-B (-1.46 mm2)和Ellipse (-1.96 mm2)。Trace法在无变焦情况下精度最高(85.5%),SDD最低(1.57 mm2)。在变焦和非变焦条件下,所有方法的插值信度都显著高于变焦条件下的插值信度,其中Trace方法在变焦和非变焦条件下的插值信度都最高。结论:3种超声方法测量正中神经CSA均具有较高的可靠性,其中Trace法在准确度和精密度上有一定的优势。变焦增强了视图,提高了互连器的可靠性,但降低了测量精度。基于我们的发现,我们推荐非变焦跟踪方法,以保持一致的纵向测量,尽管在一个选定的方法中保持熟练程度更重要。有必要进行更大规模的研究进一步验证。证据等级:二级。
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
HAND
HAND Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
209
期刊介绍: HAND is the official journal of the American Association for Hand Surgery and is a peer-reviewed journal featuring articles written by clinicians worldwide presenting current research and clinical work in the field of hand surgery. It features articles related to all aspects of hand and upper extremity surgery and the post operative care and rehabilitation of the hand.
×
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