Skeletal landmarks for TKR implantations: Evaluation of their accuracy using EOS imaging acquisition system

Schlatterer, B.; Suedhoff, I.; Bonnet, Xavier; Catonné, Yves; Maestro, M.; Skalli, Wafa

doi:10.1016/j.otsr.2008.05.001

Cited by 45 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Stratified by pincer size, rotation, and tilt, the intermodality ICCs showed excellent reliability between EOS 1 and conventional radiography in morphologic features of the pincer. Our study also is consistent with previous EOS 1 imaging studies, which all showed an image quality of EOS 1 comparable to improved compared with that of conventional radiography [1,6,17,18,20,24,31]. However, we did see relative horizontal widening of the image in EOS 1 with extreme anterior tilt (C 10°) and horizontal narrowing in extreme posterior tilt (C 10°) owing to the decrease or increase in distance between the x-ray beam and the pelvis (Fig.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Reliability of Overcoverage Parameters With Varying Morphologic Pincer Features: Comparison of EOS® and Radiography

Monazzam¹,

Agashe²,

Hosalkar³

2013

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Multiple radiographic parameters used for diagnosis and quantification of morphologic pincer features have emerged, but the degree to which pelvic tilt or rotation affects conventional radiography and EOS 1 is unknown. Question/purposes We asked: (1) What is the reliability of EOS 1 and conventional radiography at increasing sizes of morphologic pincer features with varying degrees of tilt and rotation? (2) What is the effect of tilt and rotation on acetabular overcoverage measurements? Methods Using a dry cadaveric pelvis, AP conventional radiographs and EOS 1 images were taken at intervals of increasing modeled pincer size with 0°to 15°varying tilt and rotation. Lateral center-edge angle, Sharp angle, Tönnis angle, crossover sign, and retroversion index were measured on all images. Statistical analysis was conducted. Results The intermodality intraclass correlation coefficients for conventional radiography and EOS 1 radiography across all pincer sizes, rotations, and tilts were excellent (0.93-0.98). Crossover sign was in perfect agreement in conventional radiography and EOS 1 . Rotation of the hip away from the beam source and/or increased anterior tilt falsely increased all overcoverage parameters except for Tönnis angle. Rotation away from the beam of 10°or greater or anterior tilt of 5°or greater produced a false-positive crossover sign. Conclusions EOS 1 radiography maintained excellent reliability in comparison to conventional radiography but both were equally vulnerable to the effects of tilt and rotation for quantification of hip parameters used in acetabular overcoverage assessment. A standardized pelvic radiograph ensuring that the pelvis is not excessively tilted or rotated should be used for assessing acetabular overcoverage parameters.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Reliability of Overcoverage Parameters With Varying Morphologic Pincer Features: Comparison of EOS® and Radiography

Monazzam¹,

Agashe²,

Hosalkar³

2013

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some of them were specially designed to obtain precise 3D measurements before surgery [13,30,33]. However, factors related to complexity of these techniques, reproducibility and accessibility could impede their use in daily practice.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Systems that take multiple radiographs of the knee from which a 3D image is created have been developed but are not widely used at present. 18,25 Of these, the sterEOS system (EOS imaging SA, Paris, France) appears to provide a viable alternative to 3D CT reconstruction, with a considerably lower radiation exposure.…”

Section: Alignment and Positioning Of The Componentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The radiological assessment of total and unicompartmental knee replacements

Sarmah

Patel

Hossain

et al. 2012

The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British volume

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Radiological assessment of total and unicompartmental knee replacement remains an essential part of routine care and follow-up. Appreciation of the various measurements that can be identified radiologically is important. It is likely that routine plain radiographs will continue to be used, although there has been a trend towards using newer technologies such as CT, especially in a failing knee, where it provides more detailed information, albeit with a higher radiation exposure. The purpose of this paper is to outline the radiological parameters used to evaluate knee replacements, describe how these are measured or classified, and review the current literature to determine their efficacy where possible.

show abstract

Skeletal landmarks for TKR implantations: Evaluation of their accuracy using EOS imaging acquisition system

Cited by 45 publications

References 19 publications

Reliability of Overcoverage Parameters With Varying Morphologic Pincer Features: Comparison of EOS® and Radiography

Reliability of Overcoverage Parameters With Varying Morphologic Pincer Features: Comparison of EOS® and Radiography

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

The radiological assessment of total and unicompartmental knee replacements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About