锥形束负重计算机断层扫描分析全踝关节置换术定位的可靠性以及与负重 X 射线测量的比较。

IF 2.4 2区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Foot & Ankle International Pub Date : 2023-07-01 Epub Date: 2023-05-26 DOI:10.1177/10711007231173672
Ben Efrima, Agustin Barbero, Joshua E Ovadia, Cristian Indino, Camilla Maccario, Federico Giuseppe Usuelli
{"title":"锥形束负重计算机断层扫描分析全踝关节置换术定位的可靠性以及与负重 X 射线测量的比较。","authors":"Ben Efrima, Agustin Barbero, Joshua E Ovadia, Cristian Indino, Camilla Maccario, Federico Giuseppe Usuelli","doi":"10.1177/10711007231173672","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The current reference standard for postoperative evaluation of total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) positioning, weightbearing radiography (WBXR), is subject to technical bias. Weightbearing cone beam computed tomography (WBCT) enables visualization of the foot's complex 3-dimensional (3D) structure under standing load. To date, no WBCT-based system for TAA positioning has been validated. The purpose of this study was to (1) assess TAA positioning using WBCT 3D models and (2) evaluate the agreement levels between 2 raters and thus evaluate the intermethod reliability with respect to WBXR.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Fifty-five consecutive patients were retrospectively reviewed. Two raters independently created a 3D WBCT model using dedicated software and recorded the following measurements: α angle, tibiotalar surface angle (TSA), hindfoot angle (HFA), tibiotalar ratio (TTR), β angle, γ angle, and Φ angle. Measurements were repeated 2 months apart in similar, independent fashion and compared to WBXR. Interobserver, intraobserver, and intermethod agreements were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All 7 measurements showed good to excellent intraobserver and interobserver reliability (ICC 0.85-0.95). The intermethod (WBCT vs WBXR) agreement showed good agreement for the γ angle (ICC 0.79); moderate agreement levels for the α angle, TSA angle, β angle, and TTR (ICC 0.68, 0.69, 0.70, and 0.69, respectively); poor agreement for the HFA (ICC 0.25); and negative agreement for the φ angle (ICC -0.2).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Position analysis of TAA using WBCT demonstrated good to excellent interobserver and intraobserver agreement and can be reliably used. Additionally, a negative to moderate agreement between standard WBCT and standard WBXR was found.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level III, retrospective study.</p>","PeriodicalId":12446,"journal":{"name":"Foot & Ankle International","volume":"44 7","pages":"637-644"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/c4/fb/10.1177_10711007231173672.PMC10350699.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reliability of Cone Beam Weightbearing Computed Tomography Analysis of Total Ankle Arthroplasty Positioning and Comparison to Weightbearing X-Ray Measurements.\",\"authors\":\"Ben Efrima, Agustin Barbero, Joshua E Ovadia, Cristian Indino, Camilla Maccario, Federico Giuseppe Usuelli\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10711007231173672\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The current reference standard for postoperative evaluation of total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) positioning, weightbearing radiography (WBXR), is subject to technical bias. Weightbearing cone beam computed tomography (WBCT) enables visualization of the foot's complex 3-dimensional (3D) structure under standing load. To date, no WBCT-based system for TAA positioning has been validated. The purpose of this study was to (1) assess TAA positioning using WBCT 3D models and (2) evaluate the agreement levels between 2 raters and thus evaluate the intermethod reliability with respect to WBXR.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Fifty-five consecutive patients were retrospectively reviewed. Two raters independently created a 3D WBCT model using dedicated software and recorded the following measurements: α angle, tibiotalar surface angle (TSA), hindfoot angle (HFA), tibiotalar ratio (TTR), β angle, γ angle, and Φ angle. Measurements were repeated 2 months apart in similar, independent fashion and compared to WBXR. Interobserver, intraobserver, and intermethod agreements were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All 7 measurements showed good to excellent intraobserver and interobserver reliability (ICC 0.85-0.95). The intermethod (WBCT vs WBXR) agreement showed good agreement for the γ angle (ICC 0.79); moderate agreement levels for the α angle, TSA angle, β angle, and TTR (ICC 0.68, 0.69, 0.70, and 0.69, respectively); poor agreement for the HFA (ICC 0.25); and negative agreement for the φ angle (ICC -0.2).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Position analysis of TAA using WBCT demonstrated good to excellent interobserver and intraobserver agreement and can be reliably used. Additionally, a negative to moderate agreement between standard WBCT and standard WBXR was found.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level III, retrospective study.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12446,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Foot & Ankle International\",\"volume\":\"44 7\",\"pages\":\"637-644\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/c4/fb/10.1177_10711007231173672.PMC10350699.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Foot & Ankle International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10711007231173672\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/5/26 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Foot & Ankle International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10711007231173672","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:目前对全踝关节置换术(TAA)定位进行术后评估的参考标准--负重放射摄影(WBXR)存在技术偏差。负重锥形束计算机断层扫描(WBCT)可在站立负荷下观察足部复杂的三维(3D)结构。迄今为止,基于 WBCT 的 TAA 定位系统尚未通过验证。本研究的目的是:(1) 使用 WBCT 三维模型评估 TAA 定位;(2) 评估两名评分者之间的一致程度,从而评估 WBXR 的方法间可靠性:方法:对 55 名连续患者进行回顾性检查。两名评分员使用专用软件独立创建三维 WBCT 模型,并记录以下测量值:α 角、胫骨表面角 (TSA)、后足角 (HFA)、胫骨比值 (TTR)、β 角、γ 角和 Φ 角。以相似、独立的方式在间隔 2 个月后重复测量,并与 WBXR 进行比较。计算了观察者间、观察者内和方法间的一致性:所有 7 项测量的观察者内和观察者间可靠性均为良好至优秀(ICC 0.85-0.95)。方法间(WBCT 与 WBXR)一致性显示,γ 角的一致性良好(ICC 0.79);α 角、TSA 角、β 角和 TTR 的一致性处于中等水平(ICC 分别为 0.68、0.69、0.70 和 0.69);HFA 的一致性较差(ICC 0.25);φ 角的一致性为负值(ICC -0.2):结论:使用 WBCT 对 TAA 进行位置分析显示出良好至极佳的观察者间和观察者内一致性,可以可靠地使用。此外,标准 WBCT 和标准 WBXR 之间的一致性为负到中等:证据级别:三级,回顾性研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Reliability of Cone Beam Weightbearing Computed Tomography Analysis of Total Ankle Arthroplasty Positioning and Comparison to Weightbearing X-Ray Measurements.

Reliability of Cone Beam Weightbearing Computed Tomography Analysis of Total Ankle Arthroplasty Positioning and Comparison to Weightbearing X-Ray Measurements.

Reliability of Cone Beam Weightbearing Computed Tomography Analysis of Total Ankle Arthroplasty Positioning and Comparison to Weightbearing X-Ray Measurements.

Reliability of Cone Beam Weightbearing Computed Tomography Analysis of Total Ankle Arthroplasty Positioning and Comparison to Weightbearing X-Ray Measurements.

Background: The current reference standard for postoperative evaluation of total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) positioning, weightbearing radiography (WBXR), is subject to technical bias. Weightbearing cone beam computed tomography (WBCT) enables visualization of the foot's complex 3-dimensional (3D) structure under standing load. To date, no WBCT-based system for TAA positioning has been validated. The purpose of this study was to (1) assess TAA positioning using WBCT 3D models and (2) evaluate the agreement levels between 2 raters and thus evaluate the intermethod reliability with respect to WBXR.

Methods: Fifty-five consecutive patients were retrospectively reviewed. Two raters independently created a 3D WBCT model using dedicated software and recorded the following measurements: α angle, tibiotalar surface angle (TSA), hindfoot angle (HFA), tibiotalar ratio (TTR), β angle, γ angle, and Φ angle. Measurements were repeated 2 months apart in similar, independent fashion and compared to WBXR. Interobserver, intraobserver, and intermethod agreements were calculated.

Results: All 7 measurements showed good to excellent intraobserver and interobserver reliability (ICC 0.85-0.95). The intermethod (WBCT vs WBXR) agreement showed good agreement for the γ angle (ICC 0.79); moderate agreement levels for the α angle, TSA angle, β angle, and TTR (ICC 0.68, 0.69, 0.70, and 0.69, respectively); poor agreement for the HFA (ICC 0.25); and negative agreement for the φ angle (ICC -0.2).

Conclusion: Position analysis of TAA using WBCT demonstrated good to excellent interobserver and intraobserver agreement and can be reliably used. Additionally, a negative to moderate agreement between standard WBCT and standard WBXR was found.

Level of evidence: Level III, retrospective study.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Foot & Ankle International
Foot & Ankle International 医学-整形外科
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
22.20%
发文量
144
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Foot & Ankle International (FAI), in publication since 1980, is the official journal of the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS). This monthly medical journal emphasizes surgical and medical management as it relates to the foot and ankle with a specific focus on reconstructive, trauma, and sports-related conditions utilizing the latest technological advances. FAI offers original, clinically oriented, peer-reviewed research articles presenting new approaches to foot and ankle pathology and treatment, current case reviews, and technique tips addressing the management of complex problems. This journal is an ideal resource for highly-trained orthopaedic foot and ankle specialists and allied health care providers. The journal’s Founding Editor, Melvin H. Jahss, MD (deceased), served from 1980-1988. He was followed by Kenneth A. Johnson, MD (deceased) from 1988-1993; Lowell D. Lutter, MD (deceased) from 1993-2004; and E. Greer Richardson, MD from 2005-2007. David B. Thordarson, MD, assumed the role of Editor-in-Chief in 2008. The journal focuses on the following areas of interest: • Surgery • Wound care • Bone healing • Pain management • In-office orthotic systems • Diabetes • Sports medicine
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信