Aydin Sonay, Durmaz Onder, Fatihoglu Erdem, Kadirhan Ozlem, Karavas Erdal
Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Erzincan University, 24100 Erzincan, Turkey.
Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Bandirma 17 Eylül University, 10200 Balikesir, Turkey.
Diagnostics (Basel). 2024 Oct 18;14(20):2317. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics14202317.
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: The prevalence of developmental hip dysplasia is estimated to be 0.1-2 per 1000 infants. Hip imaging by ultrasonography is considered to be the gold standard method for screening and detecting developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH), as per the Graf categorization. The classification of hip differentiation into type 1 and type 2 is determined by the alpha angle, as assessed by the Graf classification. Type 1 hips are defined as those with an alpha angle exceeding 60 degrees, whilst type 2 hips are defined as those with measurements falling within the range of 50 to 59 degrees.
The computerized patient card in our institution had a compilation of 208 hip photographs taken from 110 patients, with 98 of them being bilateral. The acquisition of these photos occurred from January 2020 to December 2020. A retrospective review was conducted on the ultrasound (US) scans, with a specific emphasis on the outcomes related to type 1 and type 2 hips.
There were 108 high-resolution US photos in the type 1 hip group and 100 high-resolution US images in the type 2 hip group. In terms of unilateral or bilateral cases, gender, or age, no statistically significant differences were seen between the two groups ( > 0.05). The FMD model exhibited a sensitivity of 86% and specificity of 70% in effectively predicting the presence of type 1 mature hips when the values surpassed 2.9 mm. The AUC (area under the curve) value achieved was 0.628.
The process of diagnostic categorization may occasionally encounter challenges in accurately differentiating between type 1 and type 2 hip separation subsequent to a hip ultrasound examination. The findings of our analysis indicate that the assessment of the FMD is a highly successful method, demonstrating both high specificity and sensitivity in differentiating between various scenarios.
背景/目的:发育性髋关节发育不良的患病率估计为每1000名婴儿中有0.1 - 2例。根据格拉夫分类法,超声髋关节成像被认为是筛查和检测发育性髋关节发育不良(DDH)的金标准方法。髋关节分化分为1型和2型是由格拉夫分类法评估的α角决定的。1型髋关节定义为α角超过60度的髋关节,而2型髋关节定义为测量值在50至59度范围内的髋关节。
我们机构的计算机化患者卡片汇编了110名患者的208张髋关节照片,其中98例为双侧。这些照片的采集时间为2020年1月至2020年12月。对超声(US)扫描进行了回顾性研究,特别关注与1型和2型髋关节相关的结果。
1型髋关节组有108张高分辨率US照片,2型髋关节组有100张高分辨率US图像。在单侧或双侧病例、性别或年龄方面,两组之间未见统计学显著差异(>0.05)。当FMD模型的值超过2.9 mm时,在有效预测1型成熟髋关节的存在方面,其敏感性为86%,特异性为70%。所获得的AUC(曲线下面积)值为0.628。
在髋关节超声检查后,诊断分类过程在准确区分1型和2型髋关节分离时偶尔可能会遇到挑战。我们的分析结果表明,FMD评估是一种非常成功的方法,在区分各种情况时具有高特异性和敏感性。