Hindfoot alignment of adult acquired flatfoot deformity: A comparison of clinical assessment and weightbearing cone beam CT examinations.
Adult acquired flatfoot deformity
Cone beam CT
Flatfoot
Hindfoot alignment
Weightbearing
Weightbearing CT
Journal
Foot and ankle surgery : official journal of the European Society of Foot and Ankle Surgeons
ISSN: 1460-9584
Titre abrégé: Foot Ankle Surg
Pays: France
ID NLM: 9609647
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2019
Dec 2019
Historique:
received:
25
07
2018
accepted:
16
10
2018
pubmed:
21
11
2018
medline:
12
3
2020
entrez:
21
11
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Clinical assessment of hindfoot alignment (HA) in adult acquired flatfoot deformity (AAFD) can be challenging and weightbearing (WB) cone beam CT (CBCT) may potentially better demonstrate this three-dimensional (3D) deformity. Therefore, we compared clinical and WB CBCT assessment of HA in patients with AAFD. In this prospective study, we included 12 men and 8 women (mean age: 52.2, range: 20-88) with flexible AAFD. All subjects also underwent WB CBCT and clinical assessment of hindfoot alignment. Three fellowship-trained foot and ankle surgeons performed six hindfoot alignment measurements on the CT images. Intra- and Inter-observer reliabilities were calculated using intra-class correlation (ICC). Measurements were compared by paired T-tests, and p-values of less than 0.05 were considered significant. The mean of clinically measured hindfoot valgus was 15.2 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.5-18.8) degrees. It was significantly different from the mean values of all WB CBCT measurements: Clinical Hindfoot Alignment Angle, 9.9 (CI: 8.9-11.1) degrees; Achilles tendon/Calcaneal Tuberosity Angle, 3.2 (CI: 1.3-5.0) degrees; Tibial axis/Calcaneal Tuberosity Angle, 6.1 (CI: 4.3-7.8) degrees; Tibial axis/Subtalar Joint Angle 7.0 (CI: 5.3-8.8) degrees, and Hindfoot Alignment Angle 22.8 (CI: 20.4-25.3) degrees. We found overall substantial to almost perfect intra- (ICC range: 0.87-0.97) and inter-observer agreements (ICC range: 0.51-0.88) for all WB CBCT measurements. Using 3D WB CBCT can help characterize the valgus hindfoot alignment in patients with AAFD. We found the different CT measurements to be reliable and repeatable, and to significantly differ from the clinical evaluation of hindfoot valgus alignment. Level II-prospective comparative study.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Clinical assessment of hindfoot alignment (HA) in adult acquired flatfoot deformity (AAFD) can be challenging and weightbearing (WB) cone beam CT (CBCT) may potentially better demonstrate this three-dimensional (3D) deformity. Therefore, we compared clinical and WB CBCT assessment of HA in patients with AAFD.
METHODS
METHODS
In this prospective study, we included 12 men and 8 women (mean age: 52.2, range: 20-88) with flexible AAFD. All subjects also underwent WB CBCT and clinical assessment of hindfoot alignment. Three fellowship-trained foot and ankle surgeons performed six hindfoot alignment measurements on the CT images. Intra- and Inter-observer reliabilities were calculated using intra-class correlation (ICC). Measurements were compared by paired T-tests, and p-values of less than 0.05 were considered significant.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The mean of clinically measured hindfoot valgus was 15.2 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.5-18.8) degrees. It was significantly different from the mean values of all WB CBCT measurements: Clinical Hindfoot Alignment Angle, 9.9 (CI: 8.9-11.1) degrees; Achilles tendon/Calcaneal Tuberosity Angle, 3.2 (CI: 1.3-5.0) degrees; Tibial axis/Calcaneal Tuberosity Angle, 6.1 (CI: 4.3-7.8) degrees; Tibial axis/Subtalar Joint Angle 7.0 (CI: 5.3-8.8) degrees, and Hindfoot Alignment Angle 22.8 (CI: 20.4-25.3) degrees. We found overall substantial to almost perfect intra- (ICC range: 0.87-0.97) and inter-observer agreements (ICC range: 0.51-0.88) for all WB CBCT measurements.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Using 3D WB CBCT can help characterize the valgus hindfoot alignment in patients with AAFD. We found the different CT measurements to be reliable and repeatable, and to significantly differ from the clinical evaluation of hindfoot valgus alignment.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
METHODS
Level II-prospective comparative study.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30455094
pii: S1268-7731(18)30301-1
doi: 10.1016/j.fas.2018.10.008
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
790-797Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2018 European Foot and Ankle Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.