Wilson Jordan N, Filliquist Barbro, Garcia Tanya C, Marcellin-Little Denis J
School of Veterinary Medicine, William R Prichard Veterinary Medical Teaching Hospital, University of California Davis, Davis, California, USA.
Department of Veterinary Surgical and Radiological Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California-Davis, Davis, California, USA.
Vet Surg. 2025 Jan;54(1):182-188. doi: 10.1111/vsu.14190. Epub 2024 Nov 6.
To compare three measurement methods for acetabular sizing and evaluate the influence of osteoarthritis (OA) on the accuracy of measurements.
Observational study.
Radiographic images of 73 hip joints from 60 dogs with cementless cups.
Radiographs were anonymized and measured independently by three observers. One observer measured 12 sets of radiographs three times. A best-fit acetabular circle (AC) and cranial-caudal acetabular line (AL) were measured on ventral-dorsal (VD) radiographic view and open leg lateral (OLL) view. A best-fit femoral head circle (FHC) was measured on VD, OLL, and craniocaudal horizontal beam (CCHB) views. Two observers scored the OA in each hip joint. Intra- and interobserver consistency and repeatability and bias relative to implanted cup size were calculated and analyzed.
Intraobserver consistency and repeatability were excellent for all measurements. Interobserver consistency was excellent (ICC > 0.9) for AC and AC and was good (0.75 < ICC ≤ 0.9) for all other methods. Bias was small for AC and AL measurements (range, -0.46 to 0.45 mm) and large for FHC measurements (-3.58 to -2.42 mm). OA score significantly influenced bias for all acetabular measurement methods (p < 0.05).
All acetabular measurement methods were highly consistent within an observer. Interobserver consistency was highest for AC and AC. FHC measurements underestimated cup size. Higher OA scores decreased the accuracy of all acetabular measurement methods.
Superimposing a circle on the acetabulum seen on VD radiographic view accurately measures the acetabulum before cementless cup placement.
比较三种髋臼尺寸测量方法，并评估骨关节炎（OA）对测量准确性的影响。
观察性研究。
60只使用非骨水泥杯的犬的73个髋关节的X线图像。
对X线片进行匿名处理，由三名观察者独立测量。一名观察者对12组X线片进行了三次测量。在腹背（VD）位X线片和开腿侧位（OLL）位片上测量最佳拟合髋臼圆（AC）和髋臼头尾线（AL）。在VD位、OLL位和颅尾水平投照（CCHB）位片上测量最佳拟合股骨头圆（FHC）。两名观察者对每个髋关节的OA进行评分。计算并分析观察者内和观察者间的一致性、重复性以及相对于植入杯尺寸的偏差。
所有测量的观察者内一致性和重复性都很好。AC和AC的观察者间一致性极佳（ICC＞0.9），其他所有方法的观察者间一致性良好（0.75＜ICC≤0.9）。AC和AL测量的偏差较小（范围为-0.46至0.45mm），FHC测量的偏差较大（-3.58至-2.42mm）。OA评分对所有髋臼测量方法的偏差有显著影响（p＜0.05）。
所有髋臼测量方法在观察者内部都具有高度一致性。AC和AC的观察者间一致性最高。FHC测量低估了杯的尺寸。较高的OA评分降低了所有髋臼测量方法的准确性。
在VD位X线片上的髋臼上叠加一个圆，可在放置非骨水泥杯之前准确测量髋臼。
