Registration based assessment of femoral torsion for rotational osteotomies based on the contralateral anatomy.

BACKGROUND: Computer-assisted techniques for surgical treatment of femoral deformities have become increasingly important. In state-of-the-art 3D deformity assessments, the contralateral side is used as template for correction as it commonly represents normal anatomy. Contributing to this, an iterative closest point (ICP) algorithm is used for registration. However, the anatomical sections of the femur with idiosyncratic features, which allow for a consistent deformity assessment with ICP algorithms being unknown. Furthermore, if there is a side-to-side difference, this is not considered in error quantification. The aim of this study was to analyze the influence and value of the different sections of the femur in 3D assessment of femoral deformities based on the contralateral anatomy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 3D triangular surface models were created from CT of 100 paired femurs (50 cadavers) without pathological anatomy. The femurs were divided into sections of eponymous anatomy of a predefined percentage of the whole femoral length. A surface registration algorithm was applied to superimpose the ipsilateral on the contralateral side. We evaluated 3D femoral contralateral registration (FCR) errors, defined as difference in 3D rotation of the respective femoral section before and after registration to the contralateral side. To compare this method, we quantified the landmark-based femoral torsion (LB FT). This was defined as the intra-individual difference in overall femoral torsion using with a landmark-based method. RESULTS: Contralateral rotational deviation ranged from 0° to 9.3° of the assessed femoral sections, depending on the section. Among the sections, the FCR error using the proximal diaphyseal area for registration was larger than any other sectional error. A combination of the lesser trochanter and the proximal diaphyseal area showed the smallest error. The LB FT error was significantly larger than any sectional error (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: We demonstrated that if the contralateral femur is used as reconstruction template, the built-in errors with the registration-based approach are smaller than the intraindividual difference of the femoral torsion between both sides. The errors are depending on the section and their idiosyncratic features used for registration. For rotational osteotomies a combination of the lesser trochanter and the proximal diaphyseal area sections seems to allow for a reconstruction with a minimal error.

Three-Dimensional Automated Assessment of the Distal Radioulnar Joint Morphology According to Sigmoid Notch Surface Orientation.

PURPOSE: To develop reproducible 3-dimensional measurements for quantification of the distal radioulnar joint (DRUJ) morphology. We hypothesized that automated 3-dimensional measurement of the ulnar variance (UV) and the sigmoid notch (SN) angle would be comparable to those of the reference standard while overcoming some drawbacks of conventional 2-dimensional measurements. METHODS: Radiological data of healthy forearm bones (radiographs and computed tomography) of 53 adult subjects were included in the study. Automated measurements were developed for assessment of the SN morphology based on 3-dimensional landmarks, incorporating subject-specific estimation of cartilage surface orientation. A common anatomical reference was defined among the different imaging modalities and a comparison of the SN angle and UV measurements was performed in radiographs, computed tomography scans, and 3-dimensional models. Finally, the 3-dimensional UV measurements were evaluated in an experimental setup using 3-dimensional printed bone models. RESULTS: The automated 3-dimensional measurements of SN subtypes showed a notably larger notch radius (18.9 mm) for negative SN angles compared with positive SN angles in subjects (16.9 mm). Similar UV measurements were obtained in healthy DRUJ morphologies, with a high correlation between radiographs and 3-dimensional measurements for the SN angle (0.77) and UV (0.85). In the experimental setup with pathological radial inclinations, UV was on average 1.13 mm larger in the radiographs compared with the 3-dimensional measurements, and 1.30 mm larger in the cases with pathological palmar tilts. Furthermore, UV radiograph measurements on the modified palmar tilt deviated from the 3-dimensional measurements. CONCLUSIONS: The developed 3-dimensional automated measurements were able to quantify morphological differences among sigmoid notch subtypes and were comparable to those of the reference standard. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The developed methods do not depend on the forearm position or orientation of the distal radius and can be used for 3-dimensional quantification of DRUJ pathologies in 3-dimensional surgical planning.

A Novel Registration-Based Approach for 3D Assessment of Posttraumatic Distal Humeral Deformities.

BACKGROUND: With current 3-dimensional (3D) computer-based methods for the assessment of deformities, a surface registration method is applied to superimpose a computer model of the pathological bone onto a mirrored computer model of the contralateral side. However, because of bilateral differences, especially in humeral torsion, such template-based approaches may introduce bias in the assessment of a distal humeral deformity. We hypothesized that a novel registration approach might prove superior to the current approach in reducing such bias, thus yielding improved accuracy of 3D assessment of distal humeral deformities. METHODS: Three-dimensional triangular surface models were generated from computed tomographic (CT) data of 100 paired humeri without a pathological condition. Humeral segments of varying, predetermined lengths, excluding the distal part of the humerus, were defined. A surface registration algorithm was applied to superimpose the humeral models of both sides based on each selected segment. Humeral contralateral registration (HCR) errors, defined as the residual differences in apparent 3D orientation between the distal parts, were evaluated. RESULTS: The mean HCR error (and standard deviation) using the distal-most humeral shaft segment to assess the angular orientation was 2.3° ± 1.1 (range, 0.5° to 5.8°). Including the humeral head in the surface registration algorithm, however, as is done currently, resulted in a higher HCR error (p < 0.001). The HCR error using the proximal-most segment was >10° in 20% of the cases and between 5° and 10° in an additional 50% of the cases. By comparison, using the proposed distal-most humeral shaft segment, the HCR error was between 5° and 10° in only 2% of cases, and was never >10°. The proximal segments are nevertheless used in the proposed method for registering humeral length. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed new approach yields a deformity assessment that is less prone to bias arising from inherent bilateral differences and therefore is more accurate than current surface registration approaches. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Accurate 3D assessment is of fundamental importance if computer-based methods are applied in the correction of posttraumatic deformities.

Assessment of the Isometry of the Anterolateral Ligament in a 3-Dimensional Weight-Bearing Computed Tomography Simulation.

PURPOSE: To simulate the most isometric insertion points of the anterolateral ligament (ALL) in a weight-bearing 3-dimensional computed tomography (CT) model using previously published anatomic landmarks and to define radiographic landmarks, which make for an easier identification of the optimal insertion points. METHODS: The most isometric femoral insertion points were analyzed for 10 individuals, using data of weight-bearing CT scans in increasing knee flexion positions. An automatic string generation algorithm helped identify isometrically optimal points using an isometric score (0 indicating optimal isometry). Subsequently, a general femoral insertion point was determined, which preserved the isometry in all tested individuals. Based on the femoral insertion point, we assessed the influence of varying tibial insertion points on the isometric behavior of the ALL. RESULTS: The defined femoral insertion point, which preserved the isometry in all analyzed individuals, had a median isometric score between 0.167 × 10-3 and 0.559 × 10-3. The average distance from the most prominent point of the lateral epicondyle was 9.7 mm (standard deviation [SD], 1.6) in a straight superior direction. In a straight lateral radiographic view, this point is located exactly at the intersection of a tangent set between the posterior cortex of the femur and a second perpendicular line intersecting at the level of the most (superior-) posterior point of the Blumensaat line. The best isometric behavior was found on the anatomically defined mean tibial insertion point, located at 37% of the width of the tibial plateau, which worsened gradually if corrected to anterior or posterior. CONCLUSIONS: We determined femoral and tibial insertion points as well as radiographic landmarks for the reconstruction of the ALL that are based on published anatomic descriptions and preserve isometry in all analyzed individuals in this study. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study provides new information, which might be helpful to define isometrically optimal insertion points for ALL reconstruction.