L Baverel1, J Brilhault2, G Odri3, M Boissard1, François Lintz4. 1. CHU de Nantes, 1 place Alexis Ricordeau, Nantes, France. 2. CHRU de Tours, 37044 Tours, France. 3. Avicenne University Hospital, 125 rue de Stalingrad, 93000 Bobigny, France. 4. Ankle and Foot Surgery Centre, Clinique de l'Union, 31240 Saint Jean, France. Electronic address: francois.lintz@clinique-union.fr.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rotation is one of the variables explaining lack of reproducibility in assessing hindfoot alignment. The hypothesis for this study was that a mathematical model predicts how this modifies radiographic hindfoot alignment measurements. METHODS: A cadaveric lower limb, disjointed at knee level, was used. Sagittal and coronal planes were fixed using a custom clamp. Standard AP views were shot every five degrees and measured hindfoot alignments were compared to theoretical values obtained from a mathematical simulation. RESULTS: Hindfoot angle was 7.04° at 0° rotation and 2.11° at -90°. Intra-class and inter-investigator correlation was 0.863. The t-test showed no significant difference (p=0.73). Intra-investigator correlation was 0.957. The R2 correlation index was 0.852. CONCLUSIONS: The mathematical model accurately predicted the variations of the hindfoot angle which was maximum when the foot was aligned with the X-rays source. It then decreased when the foot rotated away, following a parabolic curve.
BACKGROUND: Rotation is one of the variables explaining lack of reproducibility in assessing hindfoot alignment. The hypothesis for this study was that a mathematical model predicts how this modifies radiographic hindfoot alignment measurements. METHODS: A cadaveric lower limb, disjointed at knee level, was used. Sagittal and coronal planes were fixed using a custom clamp. Standard AP views were shot every five degrees and measured hindfoot alignments were compared to theoretical values obtained from a mathematical simulation. RESULTS: Hindfoot angle was 7.04° at 0° rotation and 2.11° at -90°. Intra-class and inter-investigator correlation was 0.863. The t-test showed no significant difference (p=0.73). Intra-investigator correlation was 0.957. The R2 correlation index was 0.852. CONCLUSIONS: The mathematical model accurately predicted the variations of the hindfoot angle which was maximum when the foot was aligned with the X-rays source. It then decreased when the foot rotated away, following a parabolic curve.
Authors: Eli Schmidt; Thiago Silva; Daniel Baumfeld; Kevin N Dibbern; Hee Young Lee; John Femino; Nacime Salomao Barbachan Mansur; Cesar de Cesar Netto Journal: Iowa Orthop J Date: 2021
Authors: Alexandre Leme Godoy-Santos; Alessio Bernasconi; Marcelo Bordalo-Rodrigues; François Lintz; Carlos Felipe Teixeira Lôbo; Cesar de Cesar Netto Journal: Radiol Bras Date: 2021 May-Jun
Authors: Cesar de Cesar Netto; Alessio Bernasconi; Lauren Roberts; Pedro Augusto Pontin; Francois Lintz; Guilherme Honda Saito; Andrew Roney; Andrew Elliott; Martin O'Malley Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2019-02-21
Authors: Ian M Foran; Nasima Mehraban; Stephen K Jacobsen; Daniel D Bohl; Johnny Lin; Kamran S Hamid; Simon Lee Journal: Foot Ankle Orthop Date: 2020-07-30
Authors: Alessio Bernasconi; Cesar DE Cesar; Lauren Roberts; François Lintz; Alexandre Leme Godoy-Santos; Martin Joseph O'Malley Journal: Acta Ortop Bras Date: 2021 May-Jun Impact factor: 0.513
Authors: Leonard Simon Brandenburg; Markus Siegel; Jakob Neubauer; Johanna Merz; Gerrit Bode; Jan Kühle Journal: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg Date: 2021-04-22 Impact factor: 2.928