A Clavé1,2,3, D G Maurer4, N S Nagra5, F Fazilleau6,7, C Lefèvre6,7,8, E Stindel6,7,8. 1. Faculté de Médecine, Université de Bretagne Occidentale, 22 av Camille Desmoulins, 29200, Brest Cedex, France. arnaud.clave@orange.fr. 2. Service de Chirurgie Orthopédique et Traumatologique de la Cavale Blanche, CHRU Brest, bd Tanguy Prigent, 29609, Brest Cedex, France. arnaud.clave@orange.fr. 3. LaTIM, Unité INSERM, Hôpital Morvan, 2 Av Foch, 29609, Brest Cedex, France. arnaud.clave@orange.fr. 4. Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA. 5. NDORMS, Botnar Research Centre, Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, University of Oxford, Windmill Road, Headington, Oxford, UK. 6. Faculté de Médecine, Université de Bretagne Occidentale, 22 av Camille Desmoulins, 29200, Brest Cedex, France. 7. Service de Chirurgie Orthopédique et Traumatologique de la Cavale Blanche, CHRU Brest, bd Tanguy Prigent, 29609, Brest Cedex, France. 8. LaTIM, Unité INSERM, Hôpital Morvan, 2 Av Foch, 29609, Brest Cedex, France.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lower-limb discrepancy following total hip arthroplasty is the third-most common reason for patient dissatisfaction in orthopaedic surgery. Therefore, accurate planning and evaluation methods are mandatory. The main aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability of the EOS™ system by establishing and comparing the reproducibility of lower-limb automatic and manual 3D measurements. We hypothesized that the reproducibility of the lower-limb measurements is similar regardless of the method used and with an agreement higher than 0.95 for the length parameters. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study utilized an EOS radiological database of 112 patients. Two independent observers performed two rounds of lower-limb measurements twice, either in manual 3D or automatic 3D mode. The intra- and inter-observer reproducibility was evaluated by the calculation of the intra-class coefficient for each measurement method. The methods were then compared. RESULTS: The intra- and inter-observer reproducibility for length measurements found with the manual and automatic 3D methods was always > 0.98. There was no significant difference in the reproducibility between the two measurement modes, with the exception of the offset, hip-knee-shaft, and neck-shaft angles. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate a very good reproducibility of EOS™ length measurement, regardless of the method used. Automated 3D mode is preferred for the collection of angular and offset measurements. Furthermore, manual mode measurements are not affected by surgical history. Level of evidence IV.
BACKGROUND: Lower-limb discrepancy following total hip arthroplasty is the third-most common reason for patient dissatisfaction in orthopaedic surgery. Therefore, accurate planning and evaluation methods are mandatory. The main aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability of the EOS™ system by establishing and comparing the reproducibility of lower-limb automatic and manual 3D measurements. We hypothesized that the reproducibility of the lower-limb measurements is similar regardless of the method used and with an agreement higher than 0.95 for the length parameters. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study utilized an EOS radiological database of 112 patients. Two independent observers performed two rounds of lower-limb measurements twice, either in manual 3D or automatic 3D mode. The intra- and inter-observer reproducibility was evaluated by the calculation of the intra-class coefficient for each measurement method. The methods were then compared. RESULTS: The intra- and inter-observer reproducibility for length measurements found with the manual and automatic 3D methods was always > 0.98. There was no significant difference in the reproducibility between the two measurement modes, with the exception of the offset, hip-knee-shaft, and neck-shaft angles. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate a very good reproducibility of EOS™ length measurement, regardless of the method used. Automated 3D mode is preferred for the collection of angular and offset measurements. Furthermore, manual mode measurements are not affected by surgical history. Level of evidence IV.
Entities:
Keywords:
Leg length discrepancy; Reproducibility; Total hip arthroplasty; X-ray analysis
Authors: J Y Lazennec; M A Rousseau; A Rangel; M Gorin; C Belicourt; A Brusson; Y Catonné Journal: Orthop Traumatol Surg Res Date: 2011-05-12 Impact factor: 2.256
Authors: Benjamin G Escott; Bheeshma Ravi; Adam C Weathermon; Jay Acharya; Christopher L Gordon; Paul S Babyn; Simon P Kelley; Unni G Narayanan Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2013-12-04 Impact factor: 5.284