| Literature DB >> 35733172 |
Changquan Liu1,2, Juncheng Ge3, Cheng Huang2, Weiguo Wang1,2, Qidong Zhang4,5, Wanshou Guo6,7.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The study aims to investigate the accuracy of different radiographic signs for predicting functional deficiency of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and test whether the prediction model constructed by integrating multiple radiographic signs can improve the predictive ability.Entities:
Keywords: Anterior cruciate ligament -deficient, ACLD; Knee Osteoarthritis; Predictive factor; Predictive model; Uni-compartmental knee arthroplasty; X-rays
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35733172 PMCID: PMC9215084 DOI: 10.1186/s12891-022-05568-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord ISSN: 1471-2474 Impact factor: 2.562
Fig. 1Flow chart of the study
Fig. 2Measurement of Coronal tibiofemoral subluxation (CTFS) and the maximum wear point of the proximal tibia (MWPPT) a-c The anterior–posterior (AP) standing knee X-ray and lateral X-ray of an anterior cruciate ligament-deficient (ACLD) patient (a-c). CTFS is defined as the distance between the tangent line to the outermost joint edge of the lateral condyle of the femur and the tangent line of the lateral tibial plateau (a). The red arrow indicates the maximum wear point of the proximal tibia. MWPPT% is recorded as the ratio between the distance from the maximum wear point to the anterior edge of the tibia (yellow dotted line) and the length of the medial tibial plateau (green dotted line) (c)
Fig. 3Measurement of different alignment parameters on hip-to-ankle anterior–posterior (AP) standing (a) and lateral (b) X-rays. Hip–knee–ankle angle (HKA) is the angle between the tibial mechanical axis and femoral mechanical axis, mechanical proximal tibial angle (mPTA) is the angle between the tangent of the medial and lateral tibial plateau and the mechanical axis of the tibia, and mechanical lateral distal femoral angle (mLDFA) is the angle between the tangent of the medial and lateral femoral condyle and the mechanical axis of the femur. Posterior tibial slope (PTS) is the angle between the tibial anatomical axis (a straight line connecting the midpoint of the line at 5 cm and 15 cm from the knee joint line) and tibial plateau (a line connecting the anterior and posterior points of the most proximal part of the tibial plateau)
Basic characteristic
| Variables | Total ( | ACLF ( | ACLD ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age(years) | 66.82 ± 8.40 | 66.36 ± 8.71 | 68.50 ± 7.24 | 0.254a |
| Sex | 0.560b | |||
| Female | 101 (82.8%) | 78 (81.2%) | 23 (88.5%) | |
| Male | 21 (17.2%) | 18 (18.8%) | 3 (11.5%) | |
| Side | 0.658c | |||
| Left | 61 (50.0%) | 52 (54.2%) | 9 (34.6%) | |
| Right | 61 (50.0%) | 44 (45.8%) | 17 (65.4%) | |
| MWPPT% | 49.96 ± 6.41 | 47.83 ± 4.69 | 57.83 ± 5.93 | < 0.001d |
| TSS | 0.376b | |||
| 0 | 76 (62.3%) | 57 (59.4%) | 19 (73.1%) | |
| 1 | 20 (16.4%) | 16 (16.7%) | 4 (15.4%) | |
| 2 | 26 (21.3%) | 23 (23.9%) | 3 (11.5%) | |
| CTFS (mm) | 5.17 ± 1.47 | 4.91 ± 1.24 | 6.13 ± 1.89 | 0.003d |
| HKA (°) | 7.66 ± 3.81 | 6.94 ± 3.07 | 10.34 ± 5.03 | 0.003a |
| mLDFA (°) | 89.32 ± 2.16 | 89.19 ± 2.12 | 89.80 ± 2.31 | 0.078a |
| mPTA (°) | 85.68 ± 2.08 | 85.82 ± 2.20 | 85.18 ± 1.57 | 0.095a |
| PTS (°) | 8.98 ± 1.97 | 8.62 ± 1.90 | 10.28 ± 1.73 | < 0.001d |
ACLF Anterior cruciate ligament-functional, ACLD Anterior cruciate ligament-deficient, MWPPT% the maximum wear point of the proximal tibia%, TSS Tibial spine sign, CTFS Coronal tibiofemoral subluxation, HKA Hip–knee–ankle angle, mLDFA mechanical lateral distal femoral angle, mPTA mechanical proximal tibial angle, PTS Posterior tibial slope
a the independent-samples t-test
b the Fisher’s exact test
c the Chi-square test
d the Mann–Whitney U-test
Interobserver reliability
| Variables | ICC or κ | 95% CI | |
|---|---|---|---|
| MWPPT%, ICC | 0.853 | 0.796–0.895 | < 0.001 |
| TSS, κ | 0.910 | 0.841–0.979 | < 0.001 |
| CTFS (mm), ICC | 0.846 | 0.787–0.890 | < 0.001 |
| PTS (°), ICC | 0.807 | 0.734–0.861 | < 0.001 |
ICC Intraclass correlation coefficient, CI Confidence interval, MWPPT% the maximum wear point of the proximal tibia%, TSS Tibial spine sign, CTFS Coronal tibiofemoral subluxation, PTS Posterior tibial slope
Multivariate logistic regression analysis of predictive factors for anterior cruciate ligament-deficient (ACLD)
| Variables | OR | B value ± S.E | 95% CI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MWPPT% | 1.383 | 0.342 ± 0.075 | 1.193–1.603 | < 0.001 |
| CTFS (mm) | 1.071 | 0.068 ± 0.306 | 0.588–1.951 | 0.824 |
| HKA (°) | 1.326 | 0.282 ± 0.119 | 1.051–1.673 | 0.017 |
| PTS (°) | 1.981 | 0.684 ± 0.253 | 1.207–3.253 | 0.007 |
| Constant | - | -27.147 ± 5.439 | - | < 0.001 |
OR Odds ratio, CI Confidence interval, MWPPT% the maximum wear point of the proximal tibia%, CTFS Coronal tibiofemoral subluxation, HKA Hip–knee–ankle angle, PTS Posterior tibial slope
Logistic regression model: risk score = -27.147 + [0.342*MWPPT%] + [0.282*HKA] + [0.684*PTS]
Comparison of predictive factors and predictive model of anterior cruciate ligament-deficient (ACLD)
| Variables | AUC (95% CI) | Youden indexb | Cut-off value | Sensitivity% | Specificity% | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MWPPT% | 0.906(0.829–0.983) | 0.756 | 52.4 | 92.3 | 83.3 | < 0.001 |
| HKA | 0.703(0.574–0.832) | 0.386 | 8.5 | 61.5 | 77.1 | 0.002 |
| PTS | 0.740(0.621–0.860) | 0.484 | 9.6 | 69.2 | 78.2 | < 0.001 |
| Predictive modela | 0.949(0.912–0.986) | 0.754 | 0.1 | 96.2 | 79.2 | < 0.001 |
AUC Area under the curve, CI Confidence interval, MWPPT% the maximum wear point of the proximal tibia%, HKA Hip–knee–ankle angle, PTS Posterior tibial slope
a Predictive model: risk score = -27.147 + [0.342*MWPPT%] + [0.282*HKA] + [0.684*PTS]
b Youden index = sensitivity + specificity—1
Fig. 4The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for MWPPT%, HKA, PTS, and predictive model. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.906(0.829–0.983) for MWPPT%, 0.703(0.574–0.832) for HKA, 0.740(0.621–0.860) for PTS and 0.949(0.912–0.986) for predictive model (95%CI). MWPPT%, the maximum wear point of the proximal tibia%; HKA, Hip–knee–ankle angle; PTS, posterior tibial slope; CI, confidence interval