Interrater reliability of three-dimensional reconstruction of the spine : Low-dose stereoradiography for evaluating bracing in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.
Interrater Reliabilität der dreidimensionalen Rekonstruktion der Wirbelsäule : Low-dose-Stereoradiographie zur Beurteilung der Korsetttherapie bei Adoleszenten mit idiopathischer Skoliose.
Adolescent
Braces
Child
Female
Humans
Imaging, Three-Dimensional
/ methods
Kyphosis
/ diagnostic imaging
Male
Predictive Value of Tests
Radiation Dosage
Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted
Radiosurgery
Reproducibility of Results
Retrospective Studies
Scoliosis
/ diagnostic imaging
Spine
/ diagnostic imaging
Axial rotation
Brace
Chêneau
EOS
Spino-pelvic parameters
Journal
Der Orthopade
ISSN: 1433-0431
Titre abrégé: Orthopade
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 0331266
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2020
Apr 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
23
3
2019
medline:
14
4
2020
entrez:
23
3
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Bracing constitutes the mainstay treatment for mild scoliosis. The 3D reconstruction of the spine using low-dose stereoradiographic imaging (LSI) is increasingly being used to determine the true shape of the deformity and to assess the success of bracing. The aim of the study was to validate the measurement of 3D spinopelvic parameters and vertebral rotation in the setting of bracing treatment via a reliability study conducted in adherence to the guidelines for reporting reliability and agreement studies (GRRAS). Full spine stereoradiographs of patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) who underwent Chêneau bracing were retrospectively analyzed. The 3D reconstruction was performed by two experienced operators in a blinded manner and randomized order. Rotation of every vertebra was computed in the coronal, sagittal and axial planes. Sagittal spinopelvic parameters were evaluated. All measurements were statistically compared to determine agreement of the measurement of brace correction using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). In this study, 45 patients (81% females) aged 12.5 ± 2 years were included. The mean absolute difference was less than 3.5° for all measured angles, less than 4 mm for sagittal vertical axis (SVA) and less than 1.5 mm for lateral pelvic shift. The ICC was high for all parameters (ICC >0.81). Despite the overall high reliability, the reliability of axial rotation was lower in the upper and middle thoracic spine and the lower lumbar spine. Brace wearing during full spine LSI acquisition does not affect spinal measurements. The LSI under bracing treatment produces reliable measurements of spinopelvic parameters as well as vertebral rotation. These reproducible 3D data enable spine surgeons to assess the true shape of the deformity, to quantify rotation of each vertebra and enhance the understanding of the efficacy of bracing treatment.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Bracing constitutes the mainstay treatment for mild scoliosis. The 3D reconstruction of the spine using low-dose stereoradiographic imaging (LSI) is increasingly being used to determine the true shape of the deformity and to assess the success of bracing.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
The aim of the study was to validate the measurement of 3D spinopelvic parameters and vertebral rotation in the setting of bracing treatment via a reliability study conducted in adherence to the guidelines for reporting reliability and agreement studies (GRRAS).
MATERIAL AND METHODS
METHODS
Full spine stereoradiographs of patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) who underwent Chêneau bracing were retrospectively analyzed. The 3D reconstruction was performed by two experienced operators in a blinded manner and randomized order. Rotation of every vertebra was computed in the coronal, sagittal and axial planes. Sagittal spinopelvic parameters were evaluated. All measurements were statistically compared to determine agreement of the measurement of brace correction using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).
RESULTS
RESULTS
In this study, 45 patients (81% females) aged 12.5 ± 2 years were included. The mean absolute difference was less than 3.5° for all measured angles, less than 4 mm for sagittal vertical axis (SVA) and less than 1.5 mm for lateral pelvic shift. The ICC was high for all parameters (ICC >0.81). Despite the overall high reliability, the reliability of axial rotation was lower in the upper and middle thoracic spine and the lower lumbar spine.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Brace wearing during full spine LSI acquisition does not affect spinal measurements. The LSI under bracing treatment produces reliable measurements of spinopelvic parameters as well as vertebral rotation. These reproducible 3D data enable spine surgeons to assess the true shape of the deformity, to quantify rotation of each vertebra and enhance the understanding of the efficacy of bracing treatment.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30899991
doi: 10.1007/s00132-019-03712-x
pii: 10.1007/s00132-019-03712-x
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
350-358Références
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007 Mar 1;32(5):568-73
pubmed: 17334292
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010 May 20;35(12):E530-4
pubmed: 20445468
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010 Apr 20;35(9):989-94
pubmed: 20228703
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007 Nov 1;32(23):2569-72
pubmed: 17978655
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011 Sep 15;36(20):E1306-13
pubmed: 21697768
Spine J. 2014 Sep 1;14(9):1984-90
pubmed: 24333453
Spine Deform. 2016 Mar;4(2):138-144
pubmed: 27927546
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2008;135:303-19
pubmed: 18401100
Eur Spine J. 2017 Aug;26(8):2112-2120
pubmed: 27817139
Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 2007 Oct;93(6 Suppl):141-3
pubmed: 18033112
Radiat Res. 2010 Jul;174(1):83-90
pubmed: 20681802
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1994 Jan 15;19(2):236-48
pubmed: 8153835
Radiology. 2009 Nov;253(2):520-31
pubmed: 19789227
Eur Spine J. 2016 Feb;25(2):526-31
pubmed: 25906380
Eur J Radiol. 2013 Aug;82(8):e342-9
pubmed: 23473735
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014 May 1;39(10):E601-6
pubmed: 24776699
Spine Deform. 2018 May - Jun;6(3):207-212
pubmed: 29735127
J Pediatr Orthop B. 2013 Sep;22(5):409-12
pubmed: 23652967
J Pediatr Orthop. 2000 Mar-Apr;20(2):251-4
pubmed: 10739292
Psychol Bull. 1979 Mar;86(2):420-8
pubmed: 18839484
Scoliosis. 2015 Mar 07;10:8
pubmed: 25780381
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000 Aug 15;25(16):2052-63
pubmed: 10954636
Expert Rev Med Devices. 2014 Jan;11(1):1-3
pubmed: 24251596
Eur Spine J. 2013 Nov;22(11):2427-32
pubmed: 23760569
Spine J. 2015 Dec 1;15(12):2493-502
pubmed: 26343243
Med Eng Phys. 2009 Jul;31(6):681-7
pubmed: 19230743
Spine Deform. 2015 Mar;3(2):144-150
pubmed: 27927305
Pediatr Radiol. 2004 Oct;34 Suppl 3:S183-95; discussion S234-41
pubmed: 15558260
Clin Rehabil. 1998 Jun;12(3):187-99
pubmed: 9688034
J Neurosurg Spine. 2015 Oct;23(4):505-9
pubmed: 26161517
Spine J. 2012 Nov;12(11):1052-9
pubmed: 23102842
J Pediatr Orthop. 2011 Jan-Feb;31(1 Suppl):S37-45
pubmed: 21173617
Eur Spine J. 2018 May;27(5):1082-1088
pubmed: 29340779
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017 Jan 15;42(2):98-105
pubmed: 27172281
PLoS One. 2017 Feb 2;12(2):e0171258
pubmed: 28152019
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008 Mar 19;100(6):428-36
pubmed: 18334707
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015 Oct 21;97(20):1694-701
pubmed: 26491134
Biometrics. 1977 Mar;33(1):159-74
pubmed: 843571
Int J Nurs Stud. 2011 Jun;48(6):661-71
pubmed: 21514934
Eur Spine J. 2011 Jan;20(1):135-43
pubmed: 20821027