Basingstoke and North Hampshire Hospital, Hampshire Hospitals Foundation Trust, Aldermaston Road, Basingstoke RG24 9NA, UK; Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham NG5 1PB, UK.
Basingstoke and North Hampshire Hospital, Hampshire Hospitals Foundation Trust, Aldermaston Road, Basingstoke RG24 9NA, UK.
Radiography (Lond). 2021 May;27(2):260-265. doi: 10.1016/j.radi.2020.08.001. Epub 2020 Aug 19.
Realignment knee osteotomy relies on accurate preoperative assessment of coronal alignment. Weightbearing (WB) 'long-leg' (LL) radiographs are the accepted gold-standard investigation, though in practice standard knee radiographs (short leg; SL) and non-weightbearing (NWB) cross-sectional imaging such as computed tomography (CT) scanograms have been used. We compare the accuracy of SL and NWB radiographs to formal LL alignment radiographs.
A prospectively maintained osteotomy database was reviewed to identify the study population. All patients underwent standardised weightbearing long-leg alignment radiographs. The series was screened consecutively until 30 patients who also underwent WB SL radiographs ('WB cohort'), and 30 with NWB SL ('NWB cohort') radiographs, were identified. Anatomic tibiofemoral angle was calculated by independent reviewers using a validated technique from both radiographs and contrasted.
60 patients were identified as outlined in the study protocol. There were no differences in baseline demographics. Coronal alignment calculated from SL and LL radiographs differed significantly (median difference 2.1°, p < 0.001). Alignment values from weightbearing SL radiographs demonstrated markedly greater agreement with LL values than those from NWB radiographs (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.878 vs 0.657), with the NWB cohort also exhibiting greater outlier and extreme outlier incidence.
Our data adds to the growing evidence that SL radiographs are inadequate in the interpretation of knee alignment. In addition, we demonstrate that NWB radiographs (and by extension other NWB modalities such CT scanograms) demonstrate poorer agreement to gold-standard than WB methods. Coronal alignment of the knee cannot be reliably measured from non-weightbearing imaging modalities.
Though potentially useful as an adjunct, non-weightbearing cross-sectional imaging and standard knee radiographs should not be used as a proxy for formal weightbearing long-leg radiographs in osteotomy planning.
膝关节再排列截骨术依赖于对冠状对线的准确术前评估。负重(WB)“长腿”(LL)射线照相是公认的金标准检查,但在实践中,标准膝关节射线照相(短腿;SL)和非负重(NWB)横截面成像,如计算机断层扫描(CT)扫描图,已被用于。我们比较了 SL 和 NWB 射线照相与正式的 LL 对准射线照相的准确性。
前瞻性维护的截骨术数据库被审查以确定研究人群。所有患者均接受标准负重长腿对线射线照相。该系列连续筛选,直到 30 名患者(“WB 队列”)和 30 名接受 NWB SL 射线照相(“NWB 队列”)的患者接受了 WB SL 射线照相。使用经过验证的技术由独立审查员从两种射线照相中计算出解剖胫股角度,并进行对比。
按照研究方案确定了 60 名患者。基线人口统计学数据无差异。从 SL 和 LL 射线照相计算出的冠状对线差异显著(中位数差异 2.1°,p<0.001)。与 NWB 射线照相相比,负重 SL 射线照相的对线值显示出明显更大的一致性(组内相关系数 0.878 对 0.657),NWB 队列也显示出更大的离群值和极端离群值发生率。
我们的数据增加了越来越多的证据,表明 SL 射线照相在解释膝关节对线方面是不够的。此外,我们证明 NWB 射线照相(以及扩展到其他 NWB 方式,如 CT 扫描图)与 WB 方法相比,与金标准的一致性较差。膝关节的冠状对线不能可靠地从非负重成像方式测量。
尽管作为辅助手段可能有用,但在截骨术计划中,非负重横截面成像和标准膝关节射线照相不应作为正式负重长腿射线照相的替代物。