Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Radiology 1/2005

01-01-2005 | Musculoskeletal

Quantification of axial alignment of the lower extremity on conventional and digital total leg radiographs

Authors: J. Sailer, M. Scharitzer, P. Peloschek, A. Giurea, H. Imhof, S. Grampp

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 1/2005

Login to get access

Abstract

The purpose was to assess axial alignment of the lower limb using mechanical axis measurements on conventional and digital radiographs. Total-leg radiographs of 24 patients, 8 male and 16 female, with a mean age of 68.6±10.2 years, were performed in a standardized anterior-posterior projection and standing position using a conventional and digital phosphor storage film screen radiography system. Knee joint angulation was assessed by measuring the angle between a line drawn from the center of the femoral head to the middle of the femoral condyles and a line drawn from the middle of the tibial condyles to the midpoint of the malleolus. On conventional leg radiographs, line drawing and angle measurement were performed manually with a transparent goniometer. Angle measurement on digital leg radiographs was performed on a PACS workstation using computer-assisted measurement software (IMPAX, AGFA-GEVAERT, Belgium). Evaluation time for both measurements was recorded. We diagnosed 14 varus and 10 valgus angulations of the knee joint. The mean individual difference between axis deviation of conventional digital leg radiographs was 0.93+0.6°(min 0°, max 2°), the mean difference in varus angulation was 1.13±0.45° (min 0.3°, max 2°), and the mean difference in valgus angulation was 0.65±0.71° (min 0°, max 2°). Angle measurements on conventional and digital radiographs did not show any statistically significant difference. Mean time exposure was 4.9 min/patient for manual and 1.08 min/patient for computer-assisted angle measurement (P<0.001). Computer-assisted angle measurement on digital total-leg radiographs represents a reliable method with no significant angle differences compared to conventional radiographic systems and offers a significantly lower evaluation time.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Moreland JR, Bassett LW, Hanker GJ (1987) Radiographic analysis of axial alignment of the lower extremity. J Bone Joint Surg 69A:745–749 Moreland JR, Bassett LW, Hanker GJ (1987) Radiographic analysis of axial alignment of the lower extremity. J Bone Joint Surg 69A:745–749
2.
go back to reference Lotke PA, Ecker ML (1977) Influence of positioning of prosthesis in total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg 59A:77–79 Lotke PA, Ecker ML (1977) Influence of positioning of prosthesis in total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg 59A:77–79
3.
go back to reference Paley D, Tetsworth K (1992) Mechanical axis deviation of the lower limbs: preoperative planning of uniapicular deformities of the tibia or femur. Clin Orthop 280:48–64PubMed Paley D, Tetsworth K (1992) Mechanical axis deviation of the lower limbs: preoperative planning of uniapicular deformities of the tibia or femur. Clin Orthop 280:48–64PubMed
4.
go back to reference Petersen TL, Engh GA (1988) Radiographic assessment of knee alignment after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 3:67–72PubMed Petersen TL, Engh GA (1988) Radiographic assessment of knee alignment after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 3:67–72PubMed
5.
go back to reference Tetsworth K, Paley D (1994) Malalignment of degenerative arthropathy. Orthop Clin North Am 25:367–377 Tetsworth K, Paley D (1994) Malalignment of degenerative arthropathy. Orthop Clin North Am 25:367–377
6.
go back to reference Shearman CM, Brandser EA, Kathol MH, Clark WA, Callaghan JJ (1998) An easy linear estimation of the mechanical axis on long-leg radiographs. Am J Roentgenol 170:1220–1222 Shearman CM, Brandser EA, Kathol MH, Clark WA, Callaghan JJ (1998) An easy linear estimation of the mechanical axis on long-leg radiographs. Am J Roentgenol 170:1220–1222
7.
go back to reference Krackow KA, Pepe CL, Galloway EJ (1990) A mathematical analysis of the effect of flexion and rotation an apparent varus/valgus alignment an the knee. Orthopedics 13:861–868PubMed Krackow KA, Pepe CL, Galloway EJ (1990) A mathematical analysis of the effect of flexion and rotation an apparent varus/valgus alignment an the knee. Orthopedics 13:861–868PubMed
8.
go back to reference Odenbring S, Berggren AM, Peil L (1993) Roentgenographic assessment of the hip-knee-ankle axis in medial gonarthrosis. A study of reproducibility. Clin Orthop 289:195–196PubMed Odenbring S, Berggren AM, Peil L (1993) Roentgenographic assessment of the hip-knee-ankle axis in medial gonarthrosis. A study of reproducibility. Clin Orthop 289:195–196PubMed
9.
go back to reference Sanfridsson J, Ryg L, Eklund K et al (1996) Angular configuration of the knee. Comparison of conventional measurements and the QUESTOR precision radiography system. Acta Radiol 37:633–638PubMed Sanfridsson J, Ryg L, Eklund K et al (1996) Angular configuration of the knee. Comparison of conventional measurements and the QUESTOR precision radiography system. Acta Radiol 37:633–638PubMed
10.
go back to reference Grampp S, Czerny C, Krestan C, Henk C, Heiner L, Imhof H (2003) Flachbilddetektorsysteme in der Skelettradiologie. Radiologe 43:362–366CrossRefPubMed Grampp S, Czerny C, Krestan C, Henk C, Heiner L, Imhof H (2003) Flachbilddetektorsysteme in der Skelettradiologie. Radiologe 43:362–366CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Imhof H, Dirisamer A, Fischer H, Grampp S, Heiner L, Kaderk M, Krestan C, Kainberger F (2002) Rozessmanagementänderung durch den Einsatz von RIS. PACS und Festkörperdetektoren. Radiologe 42:344–350CrossRefPubMed Imhof H, Dirisamer A, Fischer H, Grampp S, Heiner L, Kaderk M, Krestan C, Kainberger F (2002) Rozessmanagementänderung durch den Einsatz von RIS. PACS und Festkörperdetektoren. Radiologe 42:344–350CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference James JJ, Davies AG, Cowen AR, O’Connor PJO (2001) Developments in digital radiography: an equipment update. Eur Radiol 11:2616–2626CrossRefPubMed James JJ, Davies AG, Cowen AR, O’Connor PJO (2001) Developments in digital radiography: an equipment update. Eur Radiol 11:2616–2626CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference May GA, Deer DD, Dackiewicz D (2000) Impact of digital radiography on clinical workflow. J Digit Imaging 13(Suppl 1):76–78PubMed May GA, Deer DD, Dackiewicz D (2000) Impact of digital radiography on clinical workflow. J Digit Imaging 13(Suppl 1):76–78PubMed
14.
go back to reference Eklund K, Jonsson K, Lindblom G, Lundin B, Sanfridsson J, Sloth M, Sivberg B (2004) Are digital images good enough? A comparative study of conventional film-screen versus digital radiographs on printed images of total hip replacement. Eur Radiol 14:865–869CrossRefPubMed Eklund K, Jonsson K, Lindblom G, Lundin B, Sanfridsson J, Sloth M, Sivberg B (2004) Are digital images good enough? A comparative study of conventional film-screen versus digital radiographs on printed images of total hip replacement. Eur Radiol 14:865–869CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Quantification of axial alignment of the lower extremity on conventional and digital total leg radiographs
Authors
J. Sailer
M. Scharitzer
P. Peloschek
A. Giurea
H. Imhof
S. Grampp
Publication date
01-01-2005
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 1/2005
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-004-2436-8

Other articles of this Issue 1/2005

European Radiology 1/2005 Go to the issue

Letter to the Editor

Reply