Literature DB >> 27927546

New EOS Imaging Protocol Allows a Substantial Reduction in Radiation Exposure for Scoliosis Patients.

Peter O Newton1, Yash Khandwala2, Carrie E Bartley3, Fredrick G Reighard3, Tracey P Bastrom3, Burt Yaszay3.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Prospective.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the reliability of three-dimensional (3D) spinal models from Micro Dose EOS x-rays compared to standard, Low Dose EOS x-rays utilized for evaluating patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There is a strong suggestion that radiation exposure to scoliosis patients can be further reduced.
METHODS: Sixty AIS patients who received biplanar, posteroanterior, and lateral standard Low Dose spine x-rays in our EOS imaging unit (∼0.33 mGy) as part of routine care also underwent an additional set of new reduced "Micro Dose" EOS x-rays (∼0.05 mGy) using a recently developed protocol. Two measurers created 3D models of the images using sterEOS software (Low Dose x2, Micro Dose x2). From this 3D modeling software, coronal Cobb angles, sagittal (T1-T12, T4-T12, L1-L5, L1-S1), and apical axial rotation measurements were obtained. Intraclass correlations (ICCs) and standard error of measurement (upper bound of 95% confidence interval) for the differences between Low Dose and Micro Dose measurements were compared. Interrater reliability was assessed on standard two-dimensional (2D) radiographic measurements.
RESULTS: The ICCs were rated as "substantial" to "almost perfect" for Low Dose 3D, Micro Dose 3D, and 2D measures (range 0.78-0.99). The calculated measurement error was not significantly different between groups except for intrarater error on 3D L1-L5 lordosis (2.9° Micro Dose vs. 2.2°, p = .04), interrater 3D rotation of the lumbar apex (2.6° Micro Dose vs. 1.7°, p = .03), and 2D T12-sacrum lordosis (4.6° Micro Dose vs. 3.4°, p = .04).
CONCLUSIONS: Although statistically significant differences in average measurement error were observed in lordosis and lumbar apex rotation, these differences are not believed to be clinically significant. The Micro Dose images have slightly less clarity qualitatively, yet the critical 2D and 3D measures of the curvature were reliably measured with error of measurement comparable to standard radiologic techniques. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, Diagnostic.
Copyright © 2016 Scoliosis Research Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  EOS; Low dose; Micro dose; Radiation; Radiographs; Scoliosis

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27927546     DOI: 10.1016/j.jspd.2015.09.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine Deform        ISSN: 2212-134X


  12 in total

1.  Standing in Schroth trained position significantly changes Cobb angle and leg length discrepancy: a pilot study.

Authors:  Kira Skaggs; Adrian J Lin; Lindsay M Andras; Kenneth D Illingworth; David L Skaggs
Journal:  Spine Deform       Date:  2020-06-26

2.  Interrater reliability of three-dimensional reconstruction of the spine : Low-dose stereoradiography for evaluating bracing in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  H Almansour; W Pepke; J Rehm; T Bruckner; D Spira; M Akbar
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 1.087

3.  Predictors of spontaneous lumbar curve correction in thoracic-only fusions: 3D analysis in AIS.

Authors:  Dylan Kluck; T Barrett Sullivan; Tracey P Bastrom; Carrie E Bartley; Burt Yaszay; Peter O Newton
Journal:  Spine Deform       Date:  2020-11-17

4.  Cobb angle measurement with a conventional convex echography probe and a smartphone.

Authors:  Joan Ferràs-Tarragó; J M Morales Valencia; P Rubio Belmar; S Pérez Vergara; P Jordà Gómez; J L Bas Hermida; P Bas Hermida; T Bas Hermida
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-06-14       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  How frequent should the radiographic examination be to monitor magnetically controlled growing rods? A retrospective look two to seven years postoperatively.

Authors:  Altug Yucekul; Hatice Tanriover; Kadir Abul; Ashfaq Ahmed; Tais Zulemyan; Caglar Yilgor; Ahmet Alanay
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2021-02-08       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Considerations in sagittal evaluation of the scoliotic spine.

Authors:  Saba Pasha; Malcolm Ecker; Vincent Deeney
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2018-03-14

7.  Dose, image quality and spine modeling assessment of biplanar EOS micro-dose radiographs for the follow-up of in-brace adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients.

Authors:  Baptiste Morel; Sonia Moueddeb; Eleonore Blondiaux; Stephen Richard; Manon Bachy; Raphael Vialle; Hubert Ducou Le Pointe
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-01-16       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  The effects of the three-dimensional deformity of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis on pulmonary function.

Authors:  Burt Yaszay; Tracey P Bastrom; Carrie E Bartley; Stefan Parent; Peter O Newton
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-08-11       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Secondary Cervicothoracic Scoliosis in Congenital Muscular Torticollis.

Authors:  Jun-Ho Kim; Tae-Hoon Yum; Jong Sup Shim
Journal:  Clin Orthop Surg       Date:  2019-08-12

10.  Decreased Vertical Trunk Inclination Angle and Pelvic Inclination as the Result of Mid-High-Heeled Footwear on Static Posture Parameters in Asymptomatic Young Adult Women.

Authors:  Jakub Michoński; Marcin Witkowski; Bożena Glinkowska; Robert Sitnik; Wojciech Glinkowski
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2019-11-18       Impact factor: 3.390

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.