Cargando…

Measuring standing hindfoot alignment: reliability of different approaches in conventional x-ray and cone-beam CT

INTRODUCTION: Currently there is no consensus how hindfoot alignment (HA) should be assessed in CBCT scans. The aim of this study is to investigate how the reliability is affected by the anatomical structures chosen for the measurement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Datasets consisting of a Saltzman View (...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Brandenburg, Leonard Simon, Siegel, Markus, Neubauer, Jakob, Merz, Johanna, Bode, Gerrit, Kühle, Jan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9522738/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33885961
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00402-021-03904-1
_version_ 1784800123040038912
author Brandenburg, Leonard Simon
Siegel, Markus
Neubauer, Jakob
Merz, Johanna
Bode, Gerrit
Kühle, Jan
author_facet Brandenburg, Leonard Simon
Siegel, Markus
Neubauer, Jakob
Merz, Johanna
Bode, Gerrit
Kühle, Jan
author_sort Brandenburg, Leonard Simon
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Currently there is no consensus how hindfoot alignment (HA) should be assessed in CBCT scans. The aim of this study is to investigate how the reliability is affected by the anatomical structures chosen for the measurement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Datasets consisting of a Saltzman View (SV) and a CBCT of the same foot were acquired prospectively and independently assessed by five raters regarding HA. In SVs the HA was estimated as follows: transversal shift between tibial shaft axis and heel contact point (1); angle between tibial shaft axis and a tangent at the medial (2) or lateral (3) calcaneal wall. In CBCT the HA was estimated as follows: transversal shift between the centre of the talus and the heel contact point (4); angle between a perpendicular line and a tangent at the medial (5) or lateral (6) calcaneal wall; angle between the distal tibial surface and a tangent at the medial calcaneal wall (7). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to assess inter-rater reliability. A linear regression was performed to compare the different measurement regarding their correlation. RESULTS: 32 patients were included in the study. The ICCs for the measurements 1–7 were as follows: (1) 0.924 [95% CI 0.876–0.959] (2) 0.533 [95% CI 0.377–0.692], (3) 0.553 [95% CI 0.399–0.708], (4) 0.930 [95% CI 0.866–0.962], (5) 0.00 [95% CI − 0.111 to 0.096], (6) 0.00 [95% CI − 0.103 to 0.111], (7) 0.152 [95% CI 0.027–0.330]. A linear regression between measurement 1 and 4 showed a correlation of 0.272 (p = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: It could be shown that reliability of measuring HA depends on the investigated anatomical structure. Placing a tangent along the calcaneus (2, 3, 5, 6, 7) was shown to be unreliable, whereas determining the weight-bearing heel point (1, 4) appeared to be a reliable approach. The correlation of the measurement workflows is significant (p = 0.036), but too weak (0.272) to be used clinically.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9522738
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95227382022-10-01 Measuring standing hindfoot alignment: reliability of different approaches in conventional x-ray and cone-beam CT Brandenburg, Leonard Simon Siegel, Markus Neubauer, Jakob Merz, Johanna Bode, Gerrit Kühle, Jan Arch Orthop Trauma Surg Orthopaedic Surgery INTRODUCTION: Currently there is no consensus how hindfoot alignment (HA) should be assessed in CBCT scans. The aim of this study is to investigate how the reliability is affected by the anatomical structures chosen for the measurement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Datasets consisting of a Saltzman View (SV) and a CBCT of the same foot were acquired prospectively and independently assessed by five raters regarding HA. In SVs the HA was estimated as follows: transversal shift between tibial shaft axis and heel contact point (1); angle between tibial shaft axis and a tangent at the medial (2) or lateral (3) calcaneal wall. In CBCT the HA was estimated as follows: transversal shift between the centre of the talus and the heel contact point (4); angle between a perpendicular line and a tangent at the medial (5) or lateral (6) calcaneal wall; angle between the distal tibial surface and a tangent at the medial calcaneal wall (7). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to assess inter-rater reliability. A linear regression was performed to compare the different measurement regarding their correlation. RESULTS: 32 patients were included in the study. The ICCs for the measurements 1–7 were as follows: (1) 0.924 [95% CI 0.876–0.959] (2) 0.533 [95% CI 0.377–0.692], (3) 0.553 [95% CI 0.399–0.708], (4) 0.930 [95% CI 0.866–0.962], (5) 0.00 [95% CI − 0.111 to 0.096], (6) 0.00 [95% CI − 0.103 to 0.111], (7) 0.152 [95% CI 0.027–0.330]. A linear regression between measurement 1 and 4 showed a correlation of 0.272 (p = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: It could be shown that reliability of measuring HA depends on the investigated anatomical structure. Placing a tangent along the calcaneus (2, 3, 5, 6, 7) was shown to be unreliable, whereas determining the weight-bearing heel point (1, 4) appeared to be a reliable approach. The correlation of the measurement workflows is significant (p = 0.036), but too weak (0.272) to be used clinically. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-04-22 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9522738/ /pubmed/33885961 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00402-021-03904-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Orthopaedic Surgery
Brandenburg, Leonard Simon
Siegel, Markus
Neubauer, Jakob
Merz, Johanna
Bode, Gerrit
Kühle, Jan
Measuring standing hindfoot alignment: reliability of different approaches in conventional x-ray and cone-beam CT
title Measuring standing hindfoot alignment: reliability of different approaches in conventional x-ray and cone-beam CT
title_full Measuring standing hindfoot alignment: reliability of different approaches in conventional x-ray and cone-beam CT
title_fullStr Measuring standing hindfoot alignment: reliability of different approaches in conventional x-ray and cone-beam CT
title_full_unstemmed Measuring standing hindfoot alignment: reliability of different approaches in conventional x-ray and cone-beam CT
title_short Measuring standing hindfoot alignment: reliability of different approaches in conventional x-ray and cone-beam CT
title_sort measuring standing hindfoot alignment: reliability of different approaches in conventional x-ray and cone-beam ct
topic Orthopaedic Surgery
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9522738/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33885961
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00402-021-03904-1
work_keys_str_mv AT brandenburgleonardsimon measuringstandinghindfootalignmentreliabilityofdifferentapproachesinconventionalxrayandconebeamct
AT siegelmarkus measuringstandinghindfootalignmentreliabilityofdifferentapproachesinconventionalxrayandconebeamct
AT neubauerjakob measuringstandinghindfootalignmentreliabilityofdifferentapproachesinconventionalxrayandconebeamct
AT merzjohanna measuringstandinghindfootalignmentreliabilityofdifferentapproachesinconventionalxrayandconebeamct
AT bodegerrit measuringstandinghindfootalignmentreliabilityofdifferentapproachesinconventionalxrayandconebeamct
AT kuhlejan measuringstandinghindfootalignmentreliabilityofdifferentapproachesinconventionalxrayandconebeamct