A Modified Keshishyan Index Demonstrates Three-dimensional Assessment of Asymmetry in Pediatric Pelvic Fractures.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Orthopedics Pub Date : 2026-05-01 Epub Date: 2026-05-29 DOI:10.3928/01477447-20260519-01
Kellen T Krajewski, Madeline Hornfeck, Julia S Sanders
{"title":"A Modified Keshishyan Index Demonstrates Three-dimensional Assessment of Asymmetry in Pediatric Pelvic Fractures.","authors":"Kellen T Krajewski, Madeline Hornfeck, Julia S Sanders","doi":"10.3928/01477447-20260519-01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Orthopedic surgeons use a combination of plain radiographs and computed tomography (CT) to diagnose and manage pelvic ring injuries. Historically, pelvic ring asymmetry has been calculated using the Keshishyan index (KI) measured in 2 dimensions. Three-dimensional (3D) CT modeling may assess deformity more comprehensively, aiding in treatment decisions. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of a modified KI (MKI) derived from 3D models of pediatric patients with pelvic fractures.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Two separate raters identified landmarks 3 separate times on 29 generated models. Traditional KI (TKI) was calculated using the contralateral distance between the most anterior portion of the sacroiliac joint (SAAS) and the deepest point of the acetabulum. The MKI used the contralateral distance between the SAAS and pubic tubercle. KI was calculated on correlating radiographs (RxKI). Bland-Altman analyses and intra-/interclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were used to evaluate agreement between measurement methods and reliability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>RxKI and TKI measurements exhibited similar agreement with a mean bias (MB) of -0.0205. RxKI and MKI had a MB of 0.0012, and TKI and MKI had a MB of 0.0210. TKI reliability ranged from good to excellent (Intra = 0.923, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.892-0.947; Inter = 0.897, 95% CI, 0.852-0.928), and MKI reliability was excellent (Intra = 0.938, 95% CI, 0.911-0.959; Inter = 0.912, 95% CI, 0.876-0.937).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>All methods exhibited excellent reliability, with MKI having the highest ICCs. MKI provided similar, reproducible values compared with RxKI, suggesting that clinicians can compare pelvic asymmetry values between CT and radiograph images.</p>","PeriodicalId":19631,"journal":{"name":"Orthopedics","volume":"49 3","pages":"e242-e247"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopedics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3928/01477447-20260519-01","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/5/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Orthopedic surgeons use a combination of plain radiographs and computed tomography (CT) to diagnose and manage pelvic ring injuries. Historically, pelvic ring asymmetry has been calculated using the Keshishyan index (KI) measured in 2 dimensions. Three-dimensional (3D) CT modeling may assess deformity more comprehensively, aiding in treatment decisions. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of a modified KI (MKI) derived from 3D models of pediatric patients with pelvic fractures.

Materials and methods: Two separate raters identified landmarks 3 separate times on 29 generated models. Traditional KI (TKI) was calculated using the contralateral distance between the most anterior portion of the sacroiliac joint (SAAS) and the deepest point of the acetabulum. The MKI used the contralateral distance between the SAAS and pubic tubercle. KI was calculated on correlating radiographs (RxKI). Bland-Altman analyses and intra-/interclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were used to evaluate agreement between measurement methods and reliability.

Results: RxKI and TKI measurements exhibited similar agreement with a mean bias (MB) of -0.0205. RxKI and MKI had a MB of 0.0012, and TKI and MKI had a MB of 0.0210. TKI reliability ranged from good to excellent (Intra = 0.923, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.892-0.947; Inter = 0.897, 95% CI, 0.852-0.928), and MKI reliability was excellent (Intra = 0.938, 95% CI, 0.911-0.959; Inter = 0.912, 95% CI, 0.876-0.937).

Conclusion: All methods exhibited excellent reliability, with MKI having the highest ICCs. MKI provided similar, reproducible values compared with RxKI, suggesting that clinicians can compare pelvic asymmetry values between CT and radiograph images.

改进的Keshishyan指数用于儿童骨盆骨折不对称性的三维评估。
背景:骨科医生联合使用x线平片和计算机断层扫描(CT)来诊断和处理骨盆环损伤。从历史上看,骨盆环不对称是使用二维测量的Keshishyan指数(KI)来计算的。三维(3D) CT建模可以更全面地评估畸形,帮助治疗决策。本研究旨在评估基于儿童骨盆骨折患者3D模型的改良KI (MKI)的准确性和可靠性。材料和方法:两个独立的评分者在29个生成的模型上识别了3个不同时间的地标。传统的KI (TKI)是利用骶髂关节(SAAS)最前端到髋臼最深点之间的对侧距离来计算的。MKI使用的是耻骨结节与耻骨结节之间的对侧距离。KI根据相关x线片(RxKI)计算。使用Bland-Altman分析和类内/类间相关系数(ICC)来评估测量方法与信度之间的一致性。结果:RxKI和TKI测量结果具有相似的一致性,平均偏倚(MB)为-0.0205。RxKI和MKI的MB为0.0012,TKI和MKI的MB为0.0210。TKI信度范围为良至优(Intra = 0.923, 95%可信区间[CI] 0.892 ~ 0.947; Inter = 0.897, 95% CI 0.852 ~ 0.928), MKI信度为优(Intra = 0.938, 95% CI 0.911 ~ 0.959; Inter = 0.912, 95% CI 0.876 ~ 0.937)。结论:所有方法均具有良好的可靠性,其中MKI方法的ICCs最高。与RxKI相比,MKI提供了相似的、可重复的值,这表明临床医生可以比较CT和x线片图像之间的骨盆不对称值。
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
Orthopedics
Orthopedics 医学-整形外科
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
160
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: For over 40 years, Orthopedics, a bimonthly peer-reviewed journal, has been the preferred choice of orthopedic surgeons for clinically relevant information on all aspects of adult and pediatric orthopedic surgery and treatment. Edited by Robert D''Ambrosia, MD, Chairman of the Department of Orthopedics at the University of Colorado, Denver, and former President of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, as well as an Editorial Board of over 100 international orthopedists, Orthopedics is the source to turn to for guidance in your practice. The journal offers access to current articles, as well as several years of archived content. Highlights also include Blue Ribbon articles published full text in print and online, as well as Tips & Techniques posted with every issue.
×
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
小红书