完美圆技术在磁共振成像上测量盂前骨质流失时的交互可靠性较差

Q3 Medicine

Arthroscopy Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation Pub Date : 2024-02-03 DOI:10.1016/j.asmr.2024.100905

Nata Parnes M.D. , Clare K. Green B.S. , Emily I. Wynkoop M.D. , Adam Goldman D.O. , Keith Fishbeck D.O. , Kyle J. Klahs D.O. , Robert H. Rolf M.D. , John P. Scanaliato M.D.

{"title":"完美圆技术在磁共振成像上测量盂前骨质流失时的交互可靠性较差","authors":"Nata Parnes M.D. , Clare K. Green B.S. , Emily I. Wynkoop M.D. , Adam Goldman D.O. , Keith Fishbeck D.O. , Kyle J. Klahs D.O. , Robert H. Rolf M.D. , John P. Scanaliato M.D.","doi":"10.1016/j.asmr.2024.100905","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To evaluate the reliability of the perfect circle methodology for measurement of glenoid bone loss in patients with anterior glenohumeral instability.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We performed a chart review of retrospectively collected patients who underwent isolated arthroscopic anterior labral repair between January 1 and June 30, 2021, using our institution’s electronic medical records. The inclusion criteria included isolated anterior shoulder instability with anterior labral repair and corroborated tears on magnetic resonance imaging. A total of 9 raters, either sports or shoulder and elbow fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeons, each evaluated the affected shoulder magnetic resonance imaging scans twice, with a minimum of 2 weeks between measurements. Measurements followed the “perfect circle” technique and included projected anterior-to-posterior glenoid diameter, amount of posterior bone loss, and percentage of posterior bone loss. Intrarater reliability and inter-rater reliability were then determined by calculating intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Ten consecutive patients meeting the selection criteria were chosen for inclusion in this analysis. Average estimated bone loss for the cohort was 2.45 mm, and the mean estimated glenoid diameter of the involved shoulder was 28.82 mm. The average percentage of bone loss measured 8.54%. The ICC for interobserver reliability was 0.55 for the perfect circle diameter and 0.17 for the anterior bone loss measurement (poorly to moderately reliable). The ICC for intraobserver reliability was 0.69 for the perfect circle diameter and 0.71 for anterior bone loss (moderately reliable).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The perfect circle technique for estimating anterior glenoid bone loss on magnetic resonance imaging was found to have moderate intrarater reliability; however, reliability between observers was found to be moderate to poor.</p></div><div><h3>Level of Evidence</h3><p>Level IV, diagnostic case series.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":34631,"journal":{"name":"Arthroscopy Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation","volume":"6 2","pages":"Article 100905"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666061X24000233/pdfft?md5=ce6605d7c70898461737304c0d1a2f43&pid=1-s2.0-S2666061X24000233-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Perfect Circle Technique Shows Poor Inter-rater Reliability in Measuring Anterior Glenoid Bone Loss on Magnetic Resonance Imaging\",\"authors\":\"Nata Parnes M.D. , Clare K. Green B.S. , Emily I. Wynkoop M.D. , Adam Goldman D.O. , Keith Fishbeck D.O. , Kyle J. Klahs D.O. , Robert H. Rolf M.D. , John P. Scanaliato M.D.\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.asmr.2024.100905\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To evaluate the reliability of the perfect circle methodology for measurement of glenoid bone loss in patients with anterior glenohumeral instability.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We performed a chart review of retrospectively collected patients who underwent isolated arthroscopic anterior labral repair between January 1 and June 30, 2021, using our institution’s electronic medical records. The inclusion criteria included isolated anterior shoulder instability with anterior labral repair and corroborated tears on magnetic resonance imaging. A total of 9 raters, either sports or shoulder and elbow fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeons, each evaluated the affected shoulder magnetic resonance imaging scans twice, with a minimum of 2 weeks between measurements. Measurements followed the “perfect circle” technique and included projected anterior-to-posterior glenoid diameter, amount of posterior bone loss, and percentage of posterior bone loss. Intrarater reliability and inter-rater reliability were then determined by calculating intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Ten consecutive patients meeting the selection criteria were chosen for inclusion in this analysis. Average estimated bone loss for the cohort was 2.45 mm, and the mean estimated glenoid diameter of the involved shoulder was 28.82 mm. The average percentage of bone loss measured 8.54%. The ICC for interobserver reliability was 0.55 for the perfect circle diameter and 0.17 for the anterior bone loss measurement (poorly to moderately reliable). The ICC for intraobserver reliability was 0.69 for the perfect circle diameter and 0.71 for anterior bone loss (moderately reliable).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The perfect circle technique for estimating anterior glenoid bone loss on magnetic resonance imaging was found to have moderate intrarater reliability; however, reliability between observers was found to be moderate to poor.</p></div><div><h3>Level of Evidence</h3><p>Level IV, diagnostic case series.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":34631,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Arthroscopy Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\"6 2\",\"pages\":\"Article 100905\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666061X24000233/pdfft?md5=ce6605d7c70898461737304c0d1a2f43&pid=1-s2.0-S2666061X24000233-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Arthroscopy Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666061X24000233\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthroscopy Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666061X24000233","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

方法我们利用本机构的电子病历，对 2021 年 1 月 1 日至 6 月 30 日期间接受孤立性关节镜前唇修补术的患者进行了病历回顾。纳入标准包括孤立性肩关节前侧不稳定、前唇修补术和磁共振成像证实的撕裂。共有 9 名评分员，他们都是受过运动或肩肘研究培训的骨科外科医生，每人评估受影响肩部的磁共振成像扫描两次，两次测量之间至少间隔 2 周。测量采用 "完美圆 "技术，包括髋臼前后直径、后部骨质流失量和后部骨质流失百分比。然后通过计算类内相关系数（ICC）来确定研究者内部的可靠性和研究者之间的可靠性。该组患者的平均估计骨质流失量为 2.45 毫米，受累肩关节的平均估计盂直径为 28.82 毫米。骨质流失的平均百分比为 8.54%。完美圆直径的观察者间可靠性ICC为0.55，前方骨质流失测量的观察者间可靠性ICC为0.17（可靠性差到中等）。结论在磁共振成像中估算盂前骨质缺损的完美圆技术具有中等程度的内部可靠性；但是，观察者之间的可靠性为中等至较差。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

The Perfect Circle Technique Shows Poor Inter-rater Reliability in Measuring Anterior Glenoid Bone Loss on Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Purpose

To evaluate the reliability of the perfect circle methodology for measurement of glenoid bone loss in patients with anterior glenohumeral instability.

Methods

We performed a chart review of retrospectively collected patients who underwent isolated arthroscopic anterior labral repair between January 1 and June 30, 2021, using our institution’s electronic medical records. The inclusion criteria included isolated anterior shoulder instability with anterior labral repair and corroborated tears on magnetic resonance imaging. A total of 9 raters, either sports or shoulder and elbow fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeons, each evaluated the affected shoulder magnetic resonance imaging scans twice, with a minimum of 2 weeks between measurements. Measurements followed the “perfect circle” technique and included projected anterior-to-posterior glenoid diameter, amount of posterior bone loss, and percentage of posterior bone loss. Intrarater reliability and inter-rater reliability were then determined by calculating intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs).

Results

Ten consecutive patients meeting the selection criteria were chosen for inclusion in this analysis. Average estimated bone loss for the cohort was 2.45 mm, and the mean estimated glenoid diameter of the involved shoulder was 28.82 mm. The average percentage of bone loss measured 8.54%. The ICC for interobserver reliability was 0.55 for the perfect circle diameter and 0.17 for the anterior bone loss measurement (poorly to moderately reliable). The ICC for intraobserver reliability was 0.69 for the perfect circle diameter and 0.71 for anterior bone loss (moderately reliable).

Conclusions

The perfect circle technique for estimating anterior glenoid bone loss on magnetic resonance imaging was found to have moderate intrarater reliability; however, reliability between observers was found to be moderate to poor.