Suppr超能文献

基于最佳拟合球体技术和 Alpha 角标记法的三维 CT 评估凸轮畸形。

Evaluation of Cam Deformity on 3-Dimensional Computed Tomography With the Best-Fit Sphere Technique and the Alpha Angle Marking Method.

机构信息

Department of Sports Medicine, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.

Department of Orthopedics, Academy of Orthopedics-Guangdong Province, Orthopedic Hospital of Guangdong Province, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.

出版信息

Am J Sports Med. 2021 Mar;49(4):1023-1030. doi: 10.1177/0363546520988151. Epub 2021 Feb 16.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Three-dimensional computed tomography (3D-CT) is commonly used for the evaluation of cam deformity; however, it does not display the cam border directly.

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy of the best-fit sphere (BFS) method and the alpha angle marking (AAM) method in 3D-CT evaluation for the cam border.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study (Diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Twenty-six cases of cam deformity, confirmed during hip arthroscopy, were included in this study. All patients underwent a CT scan before surgery. Using multiplanar reconstruction, we obtained reformatted CT images of oblique axial, oblique coronal, and radial views. The alpha angle and femoral head-neck offset ratio (hnoR) were measured on the reformatted CT images. The cam area on 3D-CT was displayed in 4 different ways: by importing the markers from the reformatted CT images of the oblique axial view (cam-oa), the oblique coronal view (cam-oc), or the radial view (cam-r) using the AAM method, or by using the BFS method (cam-bfs). The sizes and locations of the displayed cams were compared.

RESULTS

All hips in this study had an alpha angle greater than 60° and an hnoR smaller than 0.17. The radial view measured a larger alpha angle and smaller hnoR than the oblique axial and coronal views ( < .05). The areas of cam-oa, cam-oc, cam-r, and cam-bfs were 161.47 ± 27.96, 89.78 ± 19.23, 241.73 ± 34.55, and 329.75 ± 42.73 mm, respectively, and their medial-to-lateral ranges along the acetabulum (clockface referents) were 12:30 to 03:00, 11:30 to 01:30, 11:30 to 03:00, and 11:00 to 03:30, respectively. Among the 4 displays, cam-bfs had the largest area and medial-to-lateral range ( < .05), and cam-r had the second largest area and range ( < .05). No significant difference in the mean distances from the acetabular rim to the superior border was detected among the 4 displays ( > .05).

CONCLUSION

The cam area displayed by the BFS method on 3D-CT was larger than those evaluated by the AAM method. In the reformatted CT, the sizes and locations of cam deformity differed among the oblique axial, oblique coronal, and radial views, with the radial view showing the greatest area.

摘要

背景

三维计算机断层扫描(3D-CT)常用于评估凸轮畸形,但它不能直接显示凸轮边界。

目的

比较最佳拟合球(BFS)法和α角标记(AAM)法在 3D-CT 评估凸轮边界中的效果。

研究设计

队列研究(诊断);证据水平,3 级。

方法

纳入 26 例经髋关节镜检查证实的凸轮畸形患者。所有患者均在术前进行 CT 扫描。使用多平面重建,我们获得了斜轴、斜冠状和放射状视图的 CT 图像重建。在 CT 图像重建上测量α角和股骨头颈偏移比(hnoR)。3D-CT 上的凸轮区域以 4 种不同方式显示:通过导入斜轴视图(cam-oa)、斜冠状视图(cam-oc)或放射状视图(cam-r)的重建 CT 图像中的标记,使用 AAM 方法,或使用 BFS 方法(cam-bfs)。比较显示凸轮的大小和位置。

结果

本研究所有髋关节的α角均大于 60°,hnoR 小于 0.17。放射状视图测量的α角大于斜轴和冠状视图,hnoR 小于斜轴和冠状视图(<0.05)。cam-oa、cam-oc、cam-r 和 cam-bfs 的面积分别为 161.47±27.96、89.78±19.23、241.73±34.55 和 329.75±42.73mm,其在髋臼的内侧-外侧范围(时钟参考)分别为 12:30 至 03:00、11:30 至 01:30、11:30 至 03:00 和 11:00 至 03:30。在这 4 种显示方式中,cam-bfs 的面积和内侧-外侧范围最大(<0.05),cam-r 的面积和范围第二大(<0.05)。4 种显示方式中,从髋臼缘到上边界的平均距离无显著差异(>0.05)。

结论

3D-CT 上 BFS 法评估的凸轮面积大于 AAM 法。在 CT 图像重建中,斜轴、斜冠状和放射状视图之间凸轮畸形的大小和位置不同,放射状视图显示的面积最大。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验