Cargando…

Dual-scale single marker calibration for digital templating of total hip arthroplasty in standing radiographs: a prospective clinical study

PURPOSE: Accuracy of calibration of radiographs significantly influences the quality of digital templating for total hip arthroplasty (THA). The standard of care is calibration with external calibration markers (ECM). This method is associated with significant errors. Dual-scale single marker (DSSM)...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ries, Christian, Baltin, Christoph Tobias, Haneder, Stefan, Eysel, Peer, Hellmich, Martin, Boese, Christoph Kolja
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10030446/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35099608
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00402-022-04355-y
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: Accuracy of calibration of radiographs significantly influences the quality of digital templating for total hip arthroplasty (THA). The standard of care is calibration with external calibration markers (ECM). This method is associated with significant errors. Dual-scale single marker (DSSM) calibration methods may improve accuracy. The present prospective observational study is the first to analyze the application of a DSSM method in standing pelvis radiographs. METHODS: 100 patients with unilateral THA underwent antero-posterior pelvis radiographs with ECM and DSSM. The hip components were used as reference calibration factor (internal calibration factor; ICM). Absolute differences of calibration factors for ECM and DSSM from ICM were calculated. Absolute relative deviations (ARD) were calculated. Subgroup analysis for sex and WHO BMI category was performed. Furthermore, patients reported subjective comfort for each marker using a 10-point scale and choosing the preferred marker. RESULTS: Maximum magnification factor differences from the ICM were 23.3% and 9.5% and mean absolute differences were 12.5% and 2.1% for the ECM and DSSM, respectively. ARD from ICM was significantly lower for DSSM compared to ECM (p < 0.001). Absolute differences increased with BMI category using ECM; calibration by DSSM was consistent in all subgroups. Patients preferred DSSM over ECM (n = 53) or were indifferent (n = 20). Comfort was rated significantly higher for DSSM versus ECM (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: DSSM method showed superior results in comparison to the ECM method for calibration of digital radiographs. DSSM could be used to improve digital templating in standing radiographs.