A Burssens1, J Peeters2, M Peiffer3, R Marien4, T Lenaerts4, G Vandeputte5, J Victor3. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Ghent University Hospital, De Pintelaan 185, 9000, Ghent, Belgium. arne.burssens@ugent.be. 2. AZ Monica, Florent Pauwelslei 21, 2100, Deurne, Belgium. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Ghent University Hospital, De Pintelaan 185, 9000, Ghent, Belgium. 4. Materialise N.V., Technologielaan 15, 3001, Louvain, Belgium. 5. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, H.-Hartziekenhuis, Mechelstraat 24, 2500, Lier, Belgium.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The exact radiographic assessment of the hindfoot alignment remains challenging. This is reflected in the different measurement methods available. Weightbearing CT (WBCT) has been demonstrated to be more accurate in hindfoot measurements. However, current measurements are still performed in 2D. This study wants to assess the use of computed methods to convert the former uniplanar hindfoot measurements obtained after WBCT towards a 3D setting. METHODS: Forty-eight patients, mean age of 39.6 ± 13.2 years, with absence of hindfoot pathology were included. A WBCT was obtained, and images were subsequently segmented and analyzed using computer-aided design operations. In addition to the hindfoot angle (HA), other ankle and hindfoot parameters such as the anatomical tibia axis, talocalcaneal axis (TCA), talocrural angle, tibial inclination (TI), talar tilt, and subtalar vertical angle were determined in 2D and 3D. RESULTS: The mean [Formula: see text] was [Formula: see text] of valgus ± 3.2 and the [Formula: see text] was [Formula: see text] of valgus ± 6.5. These angles differed significantly from each other with a [Formula: see text]. The correlation between both showed to be good by [Formula: see text] Pearson correlation coefficient (r) of 0.72 ([Formula: see text]). The [Formula: see text] showed to be excellent when compared to the [Formula: see text], which was good. Similar findings were obtained in other angles. The highest correlation was seen between the [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] (r = 0.83, [Formula: see text]) and an almost perfect agreement in the [Formula: see text] ([Formula: see text]). CONCLUSION: This study shows a good and reliable correlation between the [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text]. However, the [Formula: see text] overcomes the shortcomings of inaccuracy and provides valuable spatial data that could be incorporated during computer-assisted surgery to assess the multiplanar correction of a hindfoot deformity.
PURPOSE: The exact radiographic assessment of the hindfoot alignment remains challenging. This is reflected in the different measurement methods available. Weightbearing CT (WBCT) has been demonstrated to be more accurate in hindfoot measurements. However, current measurements are still performed in 2D. This study wants to assess the use of computed methods to convert the former uniplanar hindfoot measurements obtained after WBCT towards a 3D setting. METHODS: Forty-eight patients, mean age of 39.6 ± 13.2 years, with absence of hindfoot pathology were included. A WBCT was obtained, and images were subsequently segmented and analyzed using computer-aided design operations. In addition to the hindfoot angle (HA), other ankle and hindfoot parameters such as the anatomical tibia axis, talocalcaneal axis (TCA), talocrural angle, tibial inclination (TI), talar tilt, and subtalar vertical angle were determined in 2D and 3D. RESULTS: The mean [Formula: see text] was [Formula: see text] of valgus ± 3.2 and the [Formula: see text] was [Formula: see text] of valgus ± 6.5. These angles differed significantly from each other with a [Formula: see text]. The correlation between both showed to be good by [Formula: see text] Pearson correlation coefficient (r) of 0.72 ([Formula: see text]). The [Formula: see text] showed to be excellent when compared to the [Formula: see text], which was good. Similar findings were obtained in other angles. The highest correlation was seen between the [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] (r = 0.83, [Formula: see text]) and an almost perfect agreement in the [Formula: see text] ([Formula: see text]). CONCLUSION: This study shows a good and reliable correlation between the [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text]. However, the [Formula: see text] overcomes the shortcomings of inaccuracy and provides valuable spatial data that could be incorporated during computer-assisted surgery to assess the multiplanar correction of a hindfoot deformity.
Authors: Francois Lintz; Tristan Barton; Mark Millet; William J Harries; Stephen Hepple; Ian G Winson Journal: Foot Ankle Surg Date: 2011-02-10 Impact factor: 2.705
Authors: François Lintz; Matthew Welck; Alessio Bernasconi; James Thornton; Nicholas P Cullen; Dishan Singh; Andy Goldberg Journal: Foot Ankle Int Date: 2017-02-09 Impact factor: 2.827
Authors: Alexej Barg; Michael D Harris; Heath B Henninger; Richard L Amendola; Charles L Saltzman; Beat Hintermann; Andrew E Anderson Journal: Foot Ankle Int Date: 2012-08 Impact factor: 2.827
Authors: Cesar de Cesar Netto; Lew C Schon; Gaurav K Thawait; Lucas Furtado da Fonseca; Apisan Chinanuvathana; Wojciech B Zbijewski; Jeffrey H Siewerdsen; Shadpour Demehri Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2017-09-20 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Michael Brehler; Gaurav Thawait; Jonathan Kaplan; John Ramsay; Miho J Tanaka; Shadpour Demehri; Jeffrey H Siewerdsen; Wojciech Zbijewski Journal: J Med Imaging (Bellingham) Date: 2019-06-19
Authors: Wouter Huysse; Arne Burssens; Matthias Peiffer; Bert Cornelis; Sjoerd A S Stufkens; Gino M M J Kerkhoffs; Kristian Buedts; Emmanuel A Audenaert Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2020-10-30 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Arne B M Burssens; Kris Buedts; Alexej Barg; Elizabeth Vluggen; Patrick Demey; Charles L Saltzman; Jan M K Victor Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2020-01 Impact factor: 4.755