Validity and reliability of different techniques of neck-shaft angle measurement.

AIM: To determine a valid and reliable neck-shaft angle (NSA) measurement method while rotating the pelvises in increments of 5° in order to simulate patient malpositioning. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CT images of 17 patients were used to produce digitally reconstructed radiographs in frontal and lateral views and three-dimensional (3D)-reconstructions of the femurs, considered to be the reference standard. Malpositioning was simulated by axially rotating the frontal radiographs from 0° to 20°. Three operators measured in two-dimensions the NSA using four different methods, three times each, at each axial rotation (AR) position. Method 1 (femoral neck axis drawn by joining the centre of the femoral head (CFH) to the median of the femoral neck base; femoral diaphysis axis drawn by joining the median of two lines passing through the medial and lateral edges of the femoral axis below the lesser trochanter) and method 2 (femoral axis taken as the median of a triangle passing through base of femoral neck and medial and lateral head-neck junction; femoral diaphysis as previous) were described for the first time; method 3 was based on a previous study; method 4 was a free-hand technique. Reliability, validity, and global uncertainty were assessed. RESULTS: Method 1 showed the best reliability and validity. The global uncertainty also showed minimal values for method 1, ranging from 7.4° to 14.3° across AR positions. CONCLUSION: Method 1, based on locating the CFH, was the most reliable and valid method and should be considered as a standardised two-dimensional NSA measurement method for clinical application.

Influence of patient rotational malpositioning on pelvic parameters assessed on lateral radiographs.

AIM: To estimate the effect of patients' axial rotation (AR) during pelvic radiograph acquisition, on the reliability and validity of sagittal pelvic parameters. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Lateral digitally reconstructed radiographs (LDRRs) were obtained from the pelvic computed tomography (CT) scans of eight children and nine adults. Then, the AR of the pelvis was simulated and the corresponding LDRRs were reconstructed at 5°, 10°, 15°, and 20° of the AR. Pelvic parameters were measured digitally on each radiograph. Intra- and interobserver variability were evaluated at each AR position (three operators repeated the measurements three times each). The bias on each clinical parameter, in each AR position, was calculated relatively to the 0° position. RESULTS: Interobserver variability increased similarly in children and adults with AR. It reached 4.4° for pelvic incidence and 4.7° for the sacral slope at 20° of AR. Biases on radiological parameters increased with AR and exceeded the acceptable threshold of errors when AR reached 10°. A linear regression was established (R2=0.834, p<0.0001) in order to estimate the AR of a patient on a lateral pelvic radiograph based on the measurement of the bifemoral distance normalized to the sagittal pelvic thickness. CONCLUSIONS: AR of patients during radiograph acquisition can be estimated in clinical practice, which would allow physicians to discard any radiographs where the calculated AR exceeded 10°.