Top

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2021 | Magnetic Resonance Imaging | Research article

Consistency of 3D femoral torsion measurement from MRI compared to CT gold standard

Authors: Thomas Vincent Häller, Pascal Schenk, Lukas Jud, Armando Hoch, Tobias Götschi, Patrick Oliver Zingg

Published in: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders | Issue 1/2021

Abstract

Background

Several hip and knee pathologies are associated with aberrant femoral torsion. Diagnostic workup includes computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). For three-dimensional (3D) analysis of complex deformities it would be desirable to measure femoral torsion from MRI data to avoid ionizing radiation of CT in a young patient population. 3D measurement of femoral torsion from MRI has not yet been compared to measurements from CT images. We hypothesize that agreement will exist between MRI and CT 3D measurements of femoral torsion.

Methods

CT and MRI data from 29 hips of 15 patients with routine diagnostic workup for suspected femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) were used to generate 3D bone models. 3D measurement of femoral torsion was performed by two independent readers using the method of Kim et al. which is validated for CT. Inter-modalitiy and inter-reader intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated.

Results

Between MRI and CT 3D measurements an ICC of 0.950 (0.898; 0.976) (reader 1) respectively 0.950 (0.897; 0.976) (Reader 2) was found. The ICC (95% CI) expressing the inter-reader reliability for both modalities was 0.945 (0.886; 0.973) for MRI and 0.957 (0.910; 0.979) for CT, respectively. Mean difference between CT and MRI measurement was 0.42° (MRI – CT, SD: 2.77°, p = 0.253).

Conclusions

There was consistency between 3D measurements of femoral torsion between computer rendered MRI images compared to measurements with the “gold standard” of CT images. ICC for inter-modality and inter-reader consistency indicate excellent reliability. Accurate, reliable and reproducible 3D measurement of femoral torsion is possible from MRI images.

Fabry G. Torsion of the femur. Acta Orthop Belg. 1977;43(4):454–9.PubMed

Dunlap K, Shands AR Jr, Hollister LC Jr, Gaul JS Jr, Streit HA. A new method for determination of torsion of the femur. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1953;35-A(2):289–311.CrossRef

Tonnis D, Heinecke A. Diminished femoral antetorsion syndrome: a cause of pain and osteoarthritis. J Pediatr Orthop. 1991;11(4):419–31. https://doi.org/10.1097/01241398-199107000-00001.CrossRefPubMed

Wedge JH, Wasylenko MJ. The natural history of congenital disease of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg (Br). 1979;61-B(3):334–8. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.61B3.158025.CrossRef

Gelberman RH, Cohen MS, Shaw BA, Kasser JR, Griffin PP, Wilkinson RH. The association of femoral retroversion with slipped capital femoral epiphysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1986;68(7):1000–7. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-198668070-00006.CrossRefPubMed

Botser IB, Ozoude GC, Martin DE, Siddiqi AJ, Kuppuswami S, Domb BG. Femoral anteversion in the hip: comparison of measurement by computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and physical examination. Arthroscopy. 2012;28(5):619–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2011.10.021.CrossRefPubMed

Sutter R, Dietrich TJ, Zingg PO, Pfirrmann CW. Femoral antetorsion: comparing asymptomatic volunteers and patients with femoroacetabular impingement. Radiology. 2012;263(2):475–83. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.12111903.CrossRefPubMed

Tibor LM, Liebert G, Sutter R, Impellizzeri FM, Leunig M. Two or more impingement and/or instability deformities are often present in patients with hip pain. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(12):3762–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-013-2918-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Souza RB, Powers CM. Concurrent criterion-related validity and reliability of a clinical test to measure femoral anteversion. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2009;39(8):586–92. https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2009.2996.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Maier C, Zingg P, Seifert B, Sutter R, Dora C. Femoral torsion: reliability and validity of the trochanteric prominence angle test. Hip Int. 2012;22(5):534–8. https://doi.org/10.5301/HIP.2012.9352.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Dunn DM. Anteversion of the neck of the femur; a method of measurement. J Bone Joint Surg (Br). 1952;34-B(2):181–6. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.34B2.181.CrossRef

12.

Sutter R, Dietrich TJ, Zingg PO, Pfirrmann CW. Assessment of femoral antetorsion with MRI: comparison of oblique measurements to standard transverse measurements. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;205(1):130–5. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.14.13617.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Tomczak RJ, Guenther KP, Rieber A, Mergo P, Ros PR, Brambs HJ. MR imaging measurement of the femoral antetorsional angle as a new technique: comparison with CT in children and adults. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;168(3):791–4. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.168.3.9057536.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Kim JS, Park TS, Park SB, Kim JS, Kim IY, Kim SI. Measurement of femoral neck anteversion in 3D. Part 1: 3D imaging method. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2000;38(6):603–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02344864.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Kim JS, Park TS, Park SB, Kim JS, Kim IY, Kim SI. Measurement of femoral neck anteversion in 3D. Part 2: 3D modelling method. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2000;38(6):610–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02344865.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Bedi A, Dolan M, Magennis E, Lipman J, Buly R, Kelly BT. Computer-assisted modeling of osseous impingement and resection in femoroacetabular impingement. Arthroscopy. 2012;28(2):204–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2011.11.005.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Heyworth BE, Dolan MM, Nguyen JT, Chen NC, Kelly BT. Preoperative three-dimensional CT predicts intraoperative findings in hip arthroscopy. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470(7):1950–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-012-2331-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Kang RW, Yanke AB, Espinoza Orias AA, Inoue N, Nho SJ. Emerging ideas: novel 3-D quantification and classification of cam lesions in patients with femoroacetabular impingement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(2):358–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-012-2693-9.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Khan O, Witt J. Evaluation of the magnitude and location of cam deformity using three dimensional CT analysis. Bone Joint J. 2014;96-B(9):1167–71. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.96B9.33555.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Milone MT, Bedi A, Poultsides L, Magennis E, Byrd JW, Larson CM, et al. Novel CT-based three-dimensional software improves the characterization of cam morphology. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(8):2484–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-013-2809-x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Amis ES Jr, Butler PF, Applegate KE, Birnbaum SB, Brateman LF, Hevezi JM, et al. American College of Radiology white paper on radiation dose in medicine. J Am Coll Radiol. 2007;4(5):272–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2007.03.002.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Wylie JD, Jenkins PA, Beckmann JT, Peters CL, Aoki SK, Maak TG. Computed tomography scans in patients with young adult hip pain carry a lifetime risk of malignancy. Arthroscopy. 2018;34(1):155–63 e3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2017.08.235.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Cibere J, Russell D, Qian H, Forster BB, Wong H, Barber M, et al. Significant association of radiographic femoroacetabular impingement with early MRI features of hip disease: a population-based study. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2016;24:22–3.CrossRef

24.

Ito K, Minka MA 2nd, Leunig M, Werlen S, Ganz R. Femoroacetabular impingement and the cam-effect. A MRI-based quantitative anatomical study of the femoral head-neck offset. J Bone Joint Surg (Br). 2001;83(2):171–6. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.83B2.0830171.CrossRef

25.

James SL, Ali K, Malara F, Young D, O'Donnell J, Connell DA. MRI findings of femoroacetabular impingement. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006;187(6):1412–9. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.05.1415.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Pfirrmann CW, Mengiardi B, Dora C, Kalberer F, Zanetti M, Hodler J. Cam and pincer femoroacetabular impingement: characteristic MR arthrographic findings in 50 patients. Radiology. 2006;240(3):778–85. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2403050767.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Samaan MA, Pedoia V, Zhang AL, Gallo MC, Link TM, Souza RB, et al. A novel mr-based method for detection of cartilage delamination in femoroacetabular impingement patients. J Orthop Res. 2018;36(3):971–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.23667.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Tresch F, Dietrich TJ, Pfirrmann CWA, Sutter R. Hip MRI: Prevalence of articular cartilage defects and labral tears in asymptomatic volunteers. A comparison with a matched population of patients with femoroacetabular impingement. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2017;46(2):440–51. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.25565.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Mygind-Klavsen B, Lund B, Nielsen TG, Maagaard N, Kraemer O, Holmich P, et al. Danish hip arthroscopy registry: predictors of outcome in patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2019;27(10):3110–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-018-4941-3.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Chai W, Xu M, Zhang GQ, Zhang LH, Gou WL, Ni M, et al. Computer-aided design and custom-made guide in corrective osteotomy for complex femoral deformity. J Huazhong Univ Sci Technol Med Sci. 2013;33(3):398–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11596-013-1131-x.CrossRef

31.

Fucentese SF, Meier P, Jud L, Kochli GL, Aichmair A, Vlachopoulos L, et al. Accuracy of 3D-planned patient specific instrumentation in high tibial open wedge valgisation osteotomy. J Exp Orthop. 2020;7(1):7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40634-020-00224-y.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

32.

Jud L, Vlachopoulos L, Haller TV, Fucentese SF, Rahm S, Zingg PO. The impact of mal-angulated femoral rotational osteotomies on mechanical leg axis: a computer simulation model. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2020;21(1):50. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-3075-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

33.

Gyftopoulos S, Yemin A, Mulholland T, Bloom M, Storey P, Geppert C, et al. 3DMR osseous reconstructions of the shoulder using a gradient-echo based two-point Dixon reconstruction: a feasibility study. Skelet Radiol. 2013;42(3):347–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-012-1489-z.CrossRef

34.

Liang X, Jacobs R, Hassan B, Li L, Pauwels R, Corpas L, et al. A comparative evaluation of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and multi-slice CT (MSCT) Part I. on subjective image quality. Eur J Radiol. 2010;75(2):265–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.03.042.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Malloy P, Gasienica J, Dawe R, Espinoza Orias AA, Nwachukwu BU, Inoue N, et al. 1.5 T magnetic resonance imaging generates accurate 3D proximal femoral models: surgical planning implications for femoroacetabular impingement. J Orthop Res. 2020;38(9):2050–6. https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.24596.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Neubert A, Wilson KJ, Engstrom C, Surowiec RK, Paproki A, Johnson N, et al. Comparison of 3D bone models of the knee joint derived from CT and 3T MR imaging. Eur J Radiol. 2017;93:178–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2017.05.042.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Rathnayaka K, Momot KI, Noser H, Volp A, Schuetz MA, Sahama T, et al. Quantification of the accuracy of MRI generated 3D models of long bones compared to CT generated 3D models. Med Eng Phys. 2012;34(3):357–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medengphy.2011.07.027.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Schneider PJ, Eberly DH. Geometric tools for computer graphics. Burlington: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers; 2003.

39.

Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med. 2016;12(2):155–63.CrossRef

40.

Samim M, Eftekhary N, Vigdorchik JM, Elbuluk A, Davidovitch R, Youm T, et al. 3D-MRI versus 3D-CT in the evaluation of osseous anatomy in femoroacetabular impingement using Dixon 3D FLASH sequence. Skelet Radiol. 2019;48(3):429–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-018-3049-7.CrossRef

Title: Consistency of 3D femoral torsion measurement from MRI compared to CT gold standard
Authors: Thomas Vincent Häller
Pascal Schenk
Lukas Jud
Armando Hoch
Tobias Götschi
Patrick Oliver Zingg
Publication date: 01-12-2021
Publisher: BioMed Central
Keywords: Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Computed Tomography
Computed Tomography
Published in: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2474
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-04633-7

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Consistency of 3D femoral torsion measurement from MRI compared to CT gold standard

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

Halo traction combined with posterior-only approach correction for cervical kyphosis with Neurofibromatosis-1: minimum 2 years follow-up

Physical activity patterns, adherence to using a wearable activity tracker during a 12-week period and correlation between self-reported function and physical activity in working age individuals with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis

Severe Guillain-Barré syndrome after surgery for multiple fractures: a rare case report with a 5-year follow-up and a brief review of the literature

Combined topical and intravenous administration of tranexamic acid further reduces postoperative blood loss in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients undergoing spinal fusion surgery: a randomized controlled trial

Validity of a simple footprint assessment board for diagnosing the severity of flatfoot: a prospective cohort study

Treatment of the fresh central slip avulsion of the extensor tendon by bone tunnel-tendon suture: a prospective cohort study