Top

European Radiology

Published in:

01-04-2012 | Pediatric

Three-dimensional measurements of the lower extremity in children and adolescents using a low-dose biplanar X-ray device

Authors: Ramon Gheno, Eric Nectoux, Bernard Herbaux, Matteo Baldisserotto, Luiz Glock, Anne Cotten, Nathalie Boutry

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 4/2012

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate three-dimensional (3D) measurements of the lower extremity using a biplanar low-dose X-ray device in children and adolescents.

Methods

Firstly, 3D measurements of eight dried bones were analysed by a biplanar low-dose X-ray device (LDX) using stereoscopic software and compared with 3D computed tomography (CT). Secondly, 47 lower limbs of children and adolescents were studied using LDX two-dimensional (2D) and 3D measurements. Both parts were evaluated for femoral and tibial lengths and mechanical angles, frontal and lateral knee angulations, and the femoral neck-shaft angle.

Results

The 3D specimen comparison between LDX and CT measurements showed no significant differences: femoral length (P = 0.069), tibial length (P = 0.059), femoral mechanical angle (P = 0.475), tibial mechanical angle (P = 0.067), frontal knee angulation (P = 0.198), lateral knee angulation (P = 0.646) and femoral neck-shaft angle (P = 0.068). The comparison between LDX 2D and 3D measurements showed significant differences in tibial length (P = 0.003), femoral mechanical angle (P < 0.001) and femoral neck-shaft angle (P = 0.001); other parameters were unremarkable.

Conclusions

The 3D LDX system presented reliable measurements compared with 3D CT. Differences between LDX 2D and 3D measurements were noted in the femoral mechanical angle, femoral neck-shaft angle and tibial length. Moderate to good interobserver agreement for the 3D LDX measurements were found.

Key Points

• Low radiation dose is essential when assessing potential lower extremity discrepancies

• A new biplanar low-dose X-ray device can assess such discrepancies in children/adolescents

• This LDX device provides equally reliable 3D measurements as prevalent practice LDX measurements carry good overall interobserver agreement.

Gurney B (2002) Leg length discrepancy. Gait Posture 15:195–206PubMedCrossRef

Knutson GA (2005) Anatomic and functional leg-length inequality: a review and recommendation for clinical decision-making. Part I, anatomic leg-length inequality: prevalence, magnitude, effects and clinical significance. Chiropr Osteopat 20;13:11

Shapiro F (1982) Developmental patterns in lower-extremity length discrepancies. J Bone Joint Surg Am 64:639–651PubMed

Sabharwal S, Zhao C, McKeon JJ, McClemens E, Edgar M, Behrens F (2006) Computed radiographic measurement of limb-length discrepancy. Full-length standing anteroposterior radiograph compared with scanogram. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88:2243–2251PubMedCrossRef

Reynolds DA (1981) Growth changes in fractured long-bones: a study of 126 children. J Bone Joint Surg Br 63-B(1):83–88

Siffert RS (1987) Lower limb-length discrepancy. J Bone Joint Surg Am 69:1100–1106PubMed

Aaron A, Weinstein D, Thickman D, Eilert R (1992) Comparison of orthoroentgenography and computed tomography in the measurement of limb-length discrepancy. J Bone Joint Surg Am 74:897–902PubMed

Paley D, Gelman A, Shualy MB, Herzenberg JE (2008) Multiplier method for limb-length prediction in the upper extremity. J Hand Surg Am 33:385–391PubMedCrossRef

Sabharwal S, Kumar A (2008) Methods for assessing leg length discrepancy. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466:2910–2922PubMedCrossRef

10.

Song KM, Halliday SE, Little DG (1997) The effect of limb-length discrepancy on gait. J Bone Joint Surg Am 79:1690–1698PubMedCrossRef

11.

Werlang HZ, Oliveira GA, Tamelini AM, Madalosso BH, Júnior FSM (2007) Escanometria dos membros inferiores: Revisitando Dr. Juan Farill. Radiol Bras 40:137–141CrossRef

12.

Delialioglu MO, Tasbas BA, Bayrakci K, Daglar B, Kurt M, Agar M et al (2006) Alternative reliable techniques in femoral torsion measurement. J Pediatr Orthop B 15:28–33PubMedCrossRef

13.

Henckel J, Richards R, Lozhkin K, Harris S, y Baena FMR, Barrett ARW et al (2006) Very low-dose computed tomography for planning and outcome measurement in knee replacement. The imperial knee protocol. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88:1513–1518PubMedCrossRef

14.

Aitken AG, Flodmark O, Newman DE, Kilcoyne RF, Shuman WP, Mack LA (1985) Leg length determination by CT digital radiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 144:613–615PubMed

15.

Kogutt MS (1987) Computed radiographic imaging: use in low-dose leg length radiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 148:1205–1206PubMed

16.

Terjesen T, Benum P, Rossvoll I, Svenningsen S, Fløystad Isern AE, Nordbø T (1991) Leg-length discrepancy measured by ultrasonography. Acta Orthop Scand 62:121–124PubMedCrossRef

17.

Liodakis E, Kenawey M, Doxastaki I, Krettek C, Haasper C, Hankemeier S (2011) Upright MRI measurement of mechanical axis and frontal plane alignment as a new technique: a comparative study with weight bearing full length radiographs. Skeletal Radiol 40:885–88919PubMedCrossRef

18.

Dubousset J, Charpak G, Dorion I, Skalli W, Lavaste F, Deguise J et al (2005) A new 2D and 3D imaging approach to musculoskeletal physiology and pathology with low-dose radiation and the standing position: the EOS system. Bull Acad Natl Med 189:287–297PubMed

19.

Rousseau M-A, Laporte S, Chavary-Bernier E, Lazennec J-Y, Skalli W (2007) Reproducibility of measuring the shape and three-dimensional position of cervical vertebrae in upright position using the EOS stereoradiography system. Spine 32:2569–2572PubMedCrossRef

20.

Deschênes S, Charron G, Beaudoin G, Labelle H, Dubois J, Miron M-C et al (2010) Diagnostic imaging of spinal deformities: reducing patients radiation dose with a new slot-scanning X-ray imager. Spine 35:989–994PubMedCrossRef

21.

Rillardon L, Campana S, Mitton D, Skalli W, Feydy A (2005) Evaluation of the intervertebral disc spaces with a low dose radiographic system. J Radiol 86:311–319PubMedCrossRef

22.

Azmy C, Guérard S, Bonnet X, Gabrielli F, Skalli W (2010) EOS orthopaedic imaging system to study patellofemoral kinematics: assessment of uncertainty. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 96:28–36PubMedCrossRef

23.

Chaibi Y, Cresson T, Aubert B, Hausselle J, Neyret P, Hauger O et al (2011) Fast 3D reconstruction of the lower limb using a parametric model and statistical inferences and clinical measurements calculation from biplanar X-rays. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. doi:10.1080/10255842.2010.540758

24.

Ohl X, Stanchina C, Billuart F, Skalli W (2010) Shoulder bony landmarks location using the EOS low-dose stereoradiography system: a reproducibility study. Surg Radiol Anat 32:153–158PubMedCrossRef

25.

Cooke TDV, Sled EA, Scudamore RA (2007) Frontal plane knee alignment: a call for standardized measurement. J Rheumatol 34:1796–1801PubMed

26.

Paley D, Pfeil J (2000) Principles of deformity correction around the knee. Orthopade 29:18–38PubMed

27.

Sabharwal S, Zhao C (2009) The hip-knee-ankle angle in children: reference values based on a full-length standing radiograph. J Bone Joint Surg Am 91:2461–2468PubMedCrossRef

28.

Ariumi A, Sato T, Kobayashi K, Koga Y, Omori G, Minato I et al (2010) Three-dimensional lower extremity alignment in the weight-bearing standing position in healthy elderly subjects. J Orthop Sci 15:64–70PubMedCrossRef

29.

Berthonnaud E, Hilmi R, Dimnet J (2009) Personalized models of bones based on radiographic photogrammetry. Surg Radiol Anat 31:461–470PubMedCrossRef

30.

Chauhan SK, Clark GW, Lloyd S, Scott RG, Breidahl W, Sikorski JM (2004) Computer-assisted total knee replacement. A controlled cadaver study using a multi-parameter quantitative CT assessment of alignment (the Perth CT Protocol). J Bone Joint Surg Br 86:818–823PubMedCrossRef

31.

Kadoury S, Cheriet F, Laporte C, Labelle H (2007) A versatile 3D reconstruction system of the spine and pelvis for clinical assessment of spinal deformities. Med Biol Eng Comput 45:591–602PubMedCrossRef

32.

Pomero V, Mitton D, Laporte S, de Guise JA, Skalli W (2004) Fast accurate stereoradiographic 3D-reconstruction of the spine using a combined geometric and statistic model. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 19:240–247CrossRef

33.

Schlatterer B, Suedhoff I, Bonnet X, Catonne Y, Maestro M, Skalli W (2009) Skeletal landmarks for TKR implantations: evaluation of their accuracy using EOS imaging acquisition system. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 95:2–11PubMedCrossRef

34.

Hunt MA, Fowler PJ, Birmingham TB, Jenkyn TR, Giffin JR (2006) Foot rotational effects on radiographic measures of lower limb alignment. Can J Surg 49:401–406PubMed

35.

Cooke TDV, Sled EA (2009) Optimizing limb position for measuring knee anatomical axis alignment from standing knee radiographs. J Rheumatol 36:472–477PubMedCrossRef

36.

Goske MJ, Applegate KE, Boylan J, Butler PF, Callahan MJ, Coley BD et al (2008) The image gently campaign: working together to change practice. AJR Am J Roentgenol 190:273–274PubMedCrossRef

37.

Frush DP (2009) Radiation, CT, and children: the simple answer is … it’s complicated. Radiology 252:4–6PubMedCrossRef

38.

Brink JA, Amis ES (2010) Image Wisely: a campaign to increase awareness about adult radiation protection. Radiology 257:601–602PubMedCrossRef

Title: Three-dimensional measurements of the lower extremity in children and adolescents using a low-dose biplanar X-ray device
Authors: Ramon Gheno
Eric Nectoux
Bernard Herbaux
Matteo Baldisserotto
Luiz Glock
Anne Cotten
Nathalie Boutry
Publication date: 01-04-2012
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: European Radiology / Issue 4/2012
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-011-2308-y

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Three-dimensional measurements of the lower extremity in children and adolescents using a low-dose biplanar X-ray device

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Key Points

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Key Points

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 4/2012

Excess radiation and organ dose in chest and abdominal CT due to CT acquisition beyond expected anatomical boundaries

MR spectroscopy and micro-CT in evaluation of osteoporosis model in rabbits: comparison with histopathology

Urinary stone size estimation: a new segmentation algorithm-based CT method

Standardisation of liver MDCT by tracking liver parenchyma enhancement to trigger imaging

Quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging analysis of complex adnexal masses: a preliminary study

Increase in perceived case suspiciousness due to local contrast optimisation in digital screening mammography