Cargando…
Glenoid Version Assessment When the CT Field of View Does Not Permit the Friedman Method: The Robertson Method
BACKGROUND: To improve spatial resolution, current clinical shoulder cross-sectional imaging studies reduce the field of view of the shoulder, excluding the medial scapula border and preventing glenoid version measurement according to the Friedman method. PURPOSE: To evaluate a method to accurately...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9096205/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35571972 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671221083589 |
_version_ | 1784705922660040704 |
---|---|
author | Robertson, Douglas D. Sharma, Gulshan B. McMahon, Patrick J. Karas, Spero G. |
author_facet | Robertson, Douglas D. Sharma, Gulshan B. McMahon, Patrick J. Karas, Spero G. |
author_sort | Robertson, Douglas D. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: To improve spatial resolution, current clinical shoulder cross-sectional imaging studies reduce the field of view of the shoulder, excluding the medial scapula border and preventing glenoid version measurement according to the Friedman method. PURPOSE: To evaluate a method to accurately and reliably measure glenoid version on cross-sectional shoulder images when the medial scapula border is not included in the field of view, and to establish measurements equivalent to the Friedman method. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Sixty-five scapulae underwent computed tomography (CT) scanning with an optimal shoulder CT-positioning protocol. Glenoid version was measured on CT images of the full scapula using the Friedman method. We developed a measurement method (named the Robertson method) based on the glenoid vault version from partial scapula images, with a correction angle subtracted from the articular-surface-glenoid vault measurement. Comparison with the Friedman method defined the accuracy of the Robertson method. Three observers tested inter- and intraobserver reliability of the Robertson method. Accuracy was statistically evaluated with t tests and reliability with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: The statistical distribution of glenoid version was similar to published data,–0.5° ± 3° [mean ± SD]. The initial measurement using the Robertson method resulted in a more retroverted angle compared with the Friedman method, and a correction angle of 7° was then applied. After this adjustment, the difference between the 2 methods was nonsignificant (0.1° ± 4°; P > .65). Reliability of the Robertson method was excellent, as the interrater ICC was 0.77, the standard error of measurement (SEM) was 1.1° with P < .001. The intrarater ICC ranged between 0.84 and 0.92, the SEM ranged between 0.9° and 1.2° with P < .01. CONCLUSION: A validated glenoid version measurement method is now available for current clinical shoulder CT protocols that reliably create Friedman-equivalent values. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Friedman-equivalent values may be made from common clinical CTs of the shoulder and compared with prior and future Friedman measurements of the scapula. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9096205 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-90962052022-05-13 Glenoid Version Assessment When the CT Field of View Does Not Permit the Friedman Method: The Robertson Method Robertson, Douglas D. Sharma, Gulshan B. McMahon, Patrick J. Karas, Spero G. Orthop J Sports Med Article BACKGROUND: To improve spatial resolution, current clinical shoulder cross-sectional imaging studies reduce the field of view of the shoulder, excluding the medial scapula border and preventing glenoid version measurement according to the Friedman method. PURPOSE: To evaluate a method to accurately and reliably measure glenoid version on cross-sectional shoulder images when the medial scapula border is not included in the field of view, and to establish measurements equivalent to the Friedman method. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Sixty-five scapulae underwent computed tomography (CT) scanning with an optimal shoulder CT-positioning protocol. Glenoid version was measured on CT images of the full scapula using the Friedman method. We developed a measurement method (named the Robertson method) based on the glenoid vault version from partial scapula images, with a correction angle subtracted from the articular-surface-glenoid vault measurement. Comparison with the Friedman method defined the accuracy of the Robertson method. Three observers tested inter- and intraobserver reliability of the Robertson method. Accuracy was statistically evaluated with t tests and reliability with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: The statistical distribution of glenoid version was similar to published data,–0.5° ± 3° [mean ± SD]. The initial measurement using the Robertson method resulted in a more retroverted angle compared with the Friedman method, and a correction angle of 7° was then applied. After this adjustment, the difference between the 2 methods was nonsignificant (0.1° ± 4°; P > .65). Reliability of the Robertson method was excellent, as the interrater ICC was 0.77, the standard error of measurement (SEM) was 1.1° with P < .001. The intrarater ICC ranged between 0.84 and 0.92, the SEM ranged between 0.9° and 1.2° with P < .01. CONCLUSION: A validated glenoid version measurement method is now available for current clinical shoulder CT protocols that reliably create Friedman-equivalent values. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Friedman-equivalent values may be made from common clinical CTs of the shoulder and compared with prior and future Friedman measurements of the scapula. SAGE Publications 2022-05-10 /pmc/articles/PMC9096205/ /pubmed/35571972 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671221083589 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Article Robertson, Douglas D. Sharma, Gulshan B. McMahon, Patrick J. Karas, Spero G. Glenoid Version Assessment When the CT Field of View Does Not Permit the Friedman Method: The Robertson Method |
title | Glenoid Version Assessment When the CT Field of View Does Not Permit the Friedman Method: The Robertson Method |
title_full | Glenoid Version Assessment When the CT Field of View Does Not Permit the Friedman Method: The Robertson Method |
title_fullStr | Glenoid Version Assessment When the CT Field of View Does Not Permit the Friedman Method: The Robertson Method |
title_full_unstemmed | Glenoid Version Assessment When the CT Field of View Does Not Permit the Friedman Method: The Robertson Method |
title_short | Glenoid Version Assessment When the CT Field of View Does Not Permit the Friedman Method: The Robertson Method |
title_sort | glenoid version assessment when the ct field of view does not permit the friedman method: the robertson method |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9096205/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35571972 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671221083589 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT robertsondouglasd glenoidversionassessmentwhenthectfieldofviewdoesnotpermitthefriedmanmethodtherobertsonmethod AT sharmagulshanb glenoidversionassessmentwhenthectfieldofviewdoesnotpermitthefriedmanmethodtherobertsonmethod AT mcmahonpatrickj glenoidversionassessmentwhenthectfieldofviewdoesnotpermitthefriedmanmethodtherobertsonmethod AT karassperog glenoidversionassessmentwhenthectfieldofviewdoesnotpermitthefriedmanmethodtherobertsonmethod |