Heineman Nathan, Chhabra Avneesh, Zhang Lihua, Dessouky Riham, Wukich Dane
Radiology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd, Dallas, TX, 75390-9178, USA.
Orthopaedic Surgery, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
Skeletal Radiol. 2019 Feb;48(2):251-257. doi: 10.1007/s00256-018-3022-5. Epub 2018 Jul 12.
The two most widely used measurements for diagnosing and assessing the severity of hallux valgus are the hallux valgus angle (HVA) and the intermetatarsal angle (IMA). Traditionally, these have been measured by using the midaxial lines approximating the axis of each bone. A new simpler point method has been recently suggested for measuring these angles by connecting points along the medial corners of each bone. Interreader reliability of these measurements on X-ray and MRI as well as intermethod and intermodality differences have not been assessed.
A series of 56 consecutive patients between 18 and 100 years old with no history of foot trauma or orthopedic hardware in their feet were included. All had AP and lateral X-rays and MRI performed on the same foot between April 27, 2015 and March 9, 2016. Two readers measured HVA and IMA using both the traditional midaxial and new point methods. ICC correlations were obtained.
The interreader reliability for HVA was similar on point method (0.92) and traditional method (0.94). For the IMA, the ICC was 0.77 on point method versus 0.76 on traditional method. The intermodality agreement (between X-ray and MRI) was higher for HVA (ICC = 0.85, 0.88) as compared to IMA (0.58, 0.74), respectively on both methods. The mean difference between the methods was larger on traditional method = 5.5 for HVA and 2.5° for IMA.
HVA is more reliable than IMA on both methods and modalities and a significant difference exists between the magnitudes of values obtained using the two methods.
用于诊断和评估拇外翻严重程度的两种最常用测量方法是拇外翻角(HVA)和跖间角(IMA)。传统上,这些角度是通过使用近似每根骨头轴线的中轴线来测量的。最近有人提出一种更简单的点测量法,通过连接每根骨头内侧角的点来测量这些角度。尚未评估这些测量在X射线和MRI上的阅片者间可靠性以及方法间和模态间差异。
纳入56例年龄在18至100岁之间、足部无创伤或骨科植入物史的连续患者。所有患者在2015年4月27日至2016年3月9日期间,对同一只脚进行了前后位(AP)和侧位X射线及MRI检查。两名阅片者使用传统中轴线法和新点测量法测量HVA和IMA。获得组内相关系数(ICC)相关性。
HVA的阅片者间可靠性在点测量法(0.92)和传统方法(0.94)上相似。对于IMA,点测量法的ICC为0.77,传统方法为0.76。两种方法中,HVA的模态间一致性(X射线和MRI之间)更高(ICC分别为0.85、0.88),而IMA为(0.58、0.74)。传统方法上两种测量方法之间的平均差异更大,HVA为5.5°,IMA为2.5°。
在两种方法和模态上,HVA比IMA更可靠,并且使用两种方法获得的值大小之间存在显著差异。
3级。