Frédéric Sailhan1,2,3, Louis Jacob4,5, Moussa Hamadouche4,5. 1. Hospital Cochin, Paris, France. dr.sailhan@gmail.com. 2. University of Paris 5, Paris, France. dr.sailhan@gmail.com. 3. Clinic «Arago», Paris, France. dr.sailhan@gmail.com. 4. Hospital Cochin, Paris, France. 5. University of Paris 5, Paris, France.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the femoral mechanical-anatomical (FMA) and mechanical femoro-tibial (MFT) angles in an osteoarthritic population using the 2D (two dimension) and the 3D (three dimension) EOS low-dose biplanar radiographic system (EOS). METHODS: FMA and MFT angles were calculated in 127 adults with osteoarthritis. In 2D, FMA angle was measured between the femoral mechanical axis and the femoral anatomical axis, and MFT angle between the femoral mechanical axis and the tibial mechanical axis. In 3D, the measurement of FMA angle consisted of identifying specific anatomical landmarks on X-rays. MFT angle was then measured between the femoral mechanical axis and the tibial mechanical axis. The distribution of 2D and 3D values was assessed in terms of means and variances. RESULTS: Mean age was 69 ± 12 years. A total of 10% of the patients having a 3D FMA angle between 4° and 7° have a 2D-measured FMA over or underestimated. Particularly, FMA values tend to be underestimated in women in 2D. Finally, we found that men showed a tendency to a more varus morphology, with MFT values being significantly underestimated in 2D. CONCLUSIONS: The EOS 3D reconstruction system is a reliable method to measure FMA and MFT angles in an osteoarthritic population.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the femoral mechanical-anatomical (FMA) and mechanical femoro-tibial (MFT) angles in an osteoarthritic population using the 2D (two dimension) and the 3D (three dimension) EOS low-dose biplanar radiographic system (EOS). METHODS: FMA and MFT angles were calculated in 127 adults with osteoarthritis. In 2D, FMA angle was measured between the femoral mechanical axis and the femoral anatomical axis, and MFT angle between the femoral mechanical axis and the tibial mechanical axis. In 3D, the measurement of FMA angle consisted of identifying specific anatomical landmarks on X-rays. MFT angle was then measured between the femoral mechanical axis and the tibial mechanical axis. The distribution of 2D and 3D values was assessed in terms of means and variances. RESULTS: Mean age was 69 ± 12 years. A total of 10% of the patients having a 3D FMA angle between 4° and 7° have a 2D-measured FMA over or underestimated. Particularly, FMA values tend to be underestimated in women in 2D. Finally, we found that men showed a tendency to a more varus morphology, with MFT values being significantly underestimated in 2D. CONCLUSIONS: The EOS 3D reconstruction system is a reliable method to measure FMA and MFT angles in an osteoarthritic population.
Entities:
Keywords:
3D measurements; EOS biplanar X-ray system; Lower limb alignement; Ostheoarthritis; Total knee arthroplasty
Authors: Y Chaibi; T Cresson; B Aubert; J Hausselle; P Neyret; O Hauger; J A de Guise; W Skalli Journal: Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin Date: 2011-05-24 Impact factor: 1.763
Authors: Michael W Maier; Stefan Aschauer; Sebastian I Wolf; Thomas Dreher; Christian Merle; Rudi G Bitsch Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2018-09-10 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Lukas B Moser; Silvan Hess; Jean-Baptiste de Villeneuve Bargemon; Ahmad Faizan; Sally LiArno; Felix Amsler; Michael T Hirschmann; Matthieu Ollivier Journal: J Pers Med Date: 2022-01-17