Influence of the ankle position and X-ray beam angulation on the projection of the posterior facet of the subtalar joint.
Anatomy
Imaging
Subtalar joint
Weightbearing CT
Journal
Skeletal radiology
ISSN: 1432-2161
Titre abrégé: Skeletal Radiol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 7701953
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2019
Oct 2019
Historique:
received:
23
12
2018
accepted:
09
04
2019
revised:
04
04
2019
pubmed:
29
4
2019
medline:
20
2
2020
entrez:
29
4
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Using digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs), we determined how changes in the projection angle influenced the assessment of the subtalar joint. Weightbearing computed tomography (CT) scans were acquired in 27 healthy individuals. CT scans were segmented and processed to create DRRs of the hindfoot. DRRs were obtained to represent 25 different perspectives to simulate internal rotation of the ankle with and without caudal angulation of the X-ray beam. Subtalar joint morphology was quantified by determining the joint space curvature, subtalar inclination angle (SIA), calcaneal slope (CS), and projection of the subtalar joint line on three-dimensional (3-D) reconstructions of the calcaneus. The curvature of the projected joint space was altered substantially over the different DRR projections. Simulated caudal angulation of the X-ray beam with respect to the ankle decreased the SIA and CS significantly. Internal rotation also had a significant impact on the SIA and CS if the X-ray beam was in neutral or in 10° of caudal angulation. An antero-posterior (AP) view of the ankle showed the posterior area of the posterior facet, whereas a more anterior area was visible with internal rotation of the foot and caudal angulation of the X-ray beam. Internal rotation of the foot of 20° is recommended to assess the posterior aspect of the posterior facet, whereas a combined 20° internal rotation of the foot and 40° caudal angulation of the X-ray beam is best to assess the anterior aspect of the posterior facet of the subtalar joint.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31030252
doi: 10.1007/s00256-019-03220-1
pii: 10.1007/s00256-019-03220-1
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1581-1589Subventions
Organisme : Peery Research Grant University of Utah
ID : Not Available
Organisme : Peery Research Grant University of Utah
ID : Not Available
Organisme : Swiss Orthopaedics
ID : Not Available
Organisme : Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
ID : P2BSP3_174979
Références
Foot Ankle Int. 2002 Jan;23(1):37-42
pubmed: 11822690
Acta radiol. 1949 Jan 31;31(1):85-91
pubmed: 18114628
Foot Ankle Int. 2008 Apr;29(4):400-6
pubmed: 18442455
Tutor Quant Methods Psychol. 2012;8(1):23-34
pubmed: 22833776
Biomed Eng Online. 2013 Dec 20;12:131
pubmed: 24359413
Foot Ankle Int. 2014 Oct;35(10):1057-62
pubmed: 25015393
Foot Ankle Int. 2014 Nov;35(11):1153-8
pubmed: 25104749
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015 Jan;473(1):318-25
pubmed: 25315275
Foot Ankle Int. 2015 Mar;36(3):302-9
pubmed: 25380775
Skeletal Radiol. 2015 Jun;44(6):823-9
pubmed: 25672945
Foot Ankle Clin. 2015 Jun;20(2):223-41
pubmed: 26043240
Foot Ankle Int. 2015 Nov;36(11):1352-61
pubmed: 26116431
Foot Ankle Int. 2016 Jan;37(1):109-14
pubmed: 26293157
Foot Ankle Int. 2016 Aug;37(8):874-81
pubmed: 27137795
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2016 Jul 18;17:297
pubmed: 27431806
EFORT Open Rev. 2017 Jul 6;2(7):309-316
pubmed: 28828179
Foot Ankle Int. 2018 Mar;39(3):376-386
pubmed: 29171283
Foot Ankle Surg. 2019 Apr;25(2):143-149
pubmed: 29409290
Foot Ankle Clin. 2018 Sep;23(3):353-374
pubmed: 30097079
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1993 May;(290):17-26
pubmed: 8472445