髋关节置换术模板时确定x线片放大倍率的更准确方法?

H. Magill, M. Ibrahim, Foad Y Mohamed, S. Grant, B. Rudran, W. Radford
{"title":"髋关节置换术模板时确定x线片放大倍率的更准确方法?","authors":"H. Magill, M. Ibrahim, Foad Y Mohamed, S. Grant, B. Rudran, W. Radford","doi":"10.17352/2455-2968.000121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The use of digital templating for Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) is now the standard approach for pre-operative planning. Digital templating holds potential to reduce operative time and post-op complications however, this often relies on imprecise assumptions. The relationship between the X-ray source, subject and detector alters the perceived magnification. We therefore determine if Body Mass Index (BMI) is positively correlated with true magnification and if a predictive model based these parameters exists. A single surgeon series (n=107) was included in this study. Two independent observers assessed both pre- and post-operative AP pelvis radiographs using TraumaCad™. Post-operative radiographs were assessed to calculate the true magnification by calibrating from a known femoral head prosthesis size. Finally, a scatter plot with regression was used to determine if a predictive model of magnification existed using the Body Mass Index. The mean pre-operative magnification using a scaling marker was 124.2 ± 8.90%. The mean post-operative magnification using a known femoral head prosthesis size (true magnification) was 123.7 ± 3.98%. Significant variability exists in pre-operative marker data. Regression modelling showed no significant correlation between BMI and true magnification (post-op magnification). This study’s suggests that the precision and reliability of the radiographic marker in daily practice is poor. Regression modelling showed no significant correlation between BMI and the true magnification factor. Therefore, a pre-op predictive model cannot be reliably used. The data from this study suggest that a fixed magnification factor of 124% remains the most reliable and accurate method.","PeriodicalId":93785,"journal":{"name":"Journal of surgery and surgical research","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A more accurate method to determine the magnification of radiographs when templating for hip arthroplasty?\",\"authors\":\"H. Magill, M. Ibrahim, Foad Y Mohamed, S. Grant, B. Rudran, W. Radford\",\"doi\":\"10.17352/2455-2968.000121\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The use of digital templating for Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) is now the standard approach for pre-operative planning. Digital templating holds potential to reduce operative time and post-op complications however, this often relies on imprecise assumptions. The relationship between the X-ray source, subject and detector alters the perceived magnification. We therefore determine if Body Mass Index (BMI) is positively correlated with true magnification and if a predictive model based these parameters exists. A single surgeon series (n=107) was included in this study. Two independent observers assessed both pre- and post-operative AP pelvis radiographs using TraumaCad™. Post-operative radiographs were assessed to calculate the true magnification by calibrating from a known femoral head prosthesis size. Finally, a scatter plot with regression was used to determine if a predictive model of magnification existed using the Body Mass Index. The mean pre-operative magnification using a scaling marker was 124.2 ± 8.90%. The mean post-operative magnification using a known femoral head prosthesis size (true magnification) was 123.7 ± 3.98%. Significant variability exists in pre-operative marker data. Regression modelling showed no significant correlation between BMI and true magnification (post-op magnification). This study’s suggests that the precision and reliability of the radiographic marker in daily practice is poor. Regression modelling showed no significant correlation between BMI and the true magnification factor. Therefore, a pre-op predictive model cannot be reliably used. The data from this study suggest that a fixed magnification factor of 124% remains the most reliable and accurate method.\",\"PeriodicalId\":93785,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of surgery and surgical research\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of surgery and surgical research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17352/2455-2968.000121\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of surgery and surgical research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17352/2455-2968.000121","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

全髋关节置换术(THA)中数字模板的使用现已成为术前计划的标准方法。数字模板具有减少手术时间和术后并发症的潜力,然而,这往往依赖于不精确的假设。x射线源、对象和探测器之间的关系改变了感知到的放大倍率。因此,我们确定身体质量指数(BMI)是否与真实放大率呈正相关,以及是否存在基于这些参数的预测模型。本研究纳入了单一外科医生系列(n=107)。两名独立观察员使用创伤辅助治疗™评估术前和术后AP骨盆x线片。评估术后x线片,根据已知的股骨头假体尺寸校准计算真实放大倍率。最后,使用回归散点图来确定是否存在使用身体质量指数的放大预测模型。术前使用缩放标记物的平均放大倍数为124.2±8.90%。术后使用已知股骨头假体大小的平均放大倍率(真实放大倍率)为123.7±3.98%。术前标记物数据存在显著差异。回归模型显示BMI与真实放大倍率(术后放大倍率)之间无显著相关性。本研究表明,在日常实践中,放射标记物的准确性和可靠性较差。回归模型显示BMI与真实放大因子之间无显著相关性。因此,不能可靠地使用预操作预测模型。本研究的数据表明,124%的固定放大系数仍然是最可靠和准确的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A more accurate method to determine the magnification of radiographs when templating for hip arthroplasty?
The use of digital templating for Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) is now the standard approach for pre-operative planning. Digital templating holds potential to reduce operative time and post-op complications however, this often relies on imprecise assumptions. The relationship between the X-ray source, subject and detector alters the perceived magnification. We therefore determine if Body Mass Index (BMI) is positively correlated with true magnification and if a predictive model based these parameters exists. A single surgeon series (n=107) was included in this study. Two independent observers assessed both pre- and post-operative AP pelvis radiographs using TraumaCad™. Post-operative radiographs were assessed to calculate the true magnification by calibrating from a known femoral head prosthesis size. Finally, a scatter plot with regression was used to determine if a predictive model of magnification existed using the Body Mass Index. The mean pre-operative magnification using a scaling marker was 124.2 ± 8.90%. The mean post-operative magnification using a known femoral head prosthesis size (true magnification) was 123.7 ± 3.98%. Significant variability exists in pre-operative marker data. Regression modelling showed no significant correlation between BMI and true magnification (post-op magnification). This study’s suggests that the precision and reliability of the radiographic marker in daily practice is poor. Regression modelling showed no significant correlation between BMI and the true magnification factor. Therefore, a pre-op predictive model cannot be reliably used. The data from this study suggest that a fixed magnification factor of 124% remains the most reliable and accurate method.
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
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信