3D measurement techniques for the hindfoot alignment angle from weight-bearing CT in a clinical population

Abstract

Cone-beam CT (CBCT) scans now enable accurate measurements on foot skeletal structures with the advantage of observing these in 3D and in weight-bearing. Among the most common skeletal deformities, the varus/valgus of the hindfoot is the most complex to be represented, and a number of measure proposals have been published. This study aims to analyze and to compare these measurements from CBCT scans in a real clinical population with large such deformity. Ten patients with severe acquired adult flatfoot and indication for surgery underwent CBCT scans (Carestream, USA) while standing on that leg, before and after surgical correction. Corresponding 3D shape of each bone of the distal shank and hindfoot were defined (Materialise, Belgium). Six different techniques from the literature were used to calculate the varus/valgus deformity, i.e. the inclination of the hindfoot in the frontal plane of the shank. Standard clinical measurements by goniometers were taken for comparison. According to these techniques, and starting from a careful 3D reconstruction of the relevant foot skeletal structures, a large spectrum of measurements was found to represent the same hindfoot alignment angle. Most of them were very different from the traditional clinical measures. The assessment of the pre-operative valgus deformity and of the corresponding post-operative correction varied considerably. CBCT finally allows 3D assessment of foot deformities in weight-bearing. Measurements from the different available techniques do not compare well, as they are based on very different approaches. It is recommended to be aware of the anatomical and functional concepts behind these techniques before clinical and surgical conclusions.

Recent Innovations Brought about by Weight-Bearing CT Imaging in the Foot and Ankle: A Systematic Review of the Literature

“…This concept in itself may be subject to variability depending on the computerized algorithm used because choices have to be made regarding multiple settings, such as where to define the limit between cartilage and bone when the cartilage cannot be seen. However, it is definitely a step forward in terms of diagnosis, which highlights again the importance of the standardization work [23] initiated by the international WBCT society.…”