Accuracy of radiographic measurement techniques for the Taylor spatial frame mounting parameters.
Deformity correction
Hexapod
Mounting parameter
Planning
Taylor spatial frame
Journal
BMC musculoskeletal disorders
ISSN: 1471-2474
Titre abrégé: BMC Musculoskelet Disord
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968565
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
18 Mar 2021
18 Mar 2021
Historique:
received:
02
06
2020
accepted:
15
02
2021
entrez:
19
3
2021
pubmed:
20
3
2021
medline:
15
5
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The correction accuracy of the Taylor Spatial Frame (TSF) fixator depends considerably on the precise determination of the mounting parameters (MP). Incorrect parameters result in secondary deformities that require subsequent corrections. Different techniques have been described to improve the precision of MP measurement, although exact calculation is reportedly impossible radiologically. The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of intraoperative and postoperative radiographic measurement methods compared to direct MP measurement from TSF bone mounting. A tibial Sawbone® model was established with different origins and reference ring positions. First, reference MPs for each origin were measured directly on the frame and bone using a calibrated, digital vernier calliper. In total 150 MPs measured with three different radiographic measurement techniques were compared to the reference MPs: digital radiographic measurements were performed using soft-copy PACS images without (method A) and with (method B) calibration and calibrated image intensifier images (method C). MPs measured from a non-calibrated X-ray image (method A) showed the highest variance compared to the reference MPs. A greater distance between the origin and the reference ring corresponded to less accurate MP measurements with method A. However, the MPs measured from calibrated X-ray images (method B) and calibrated image intensifier images (method C) were intercomparable (p = 0.226) and showed only minor differences compared to the reference values but significant differences to method A (p < 0,001). The results demonstrate that MPs can be accurately measured with radiographic techniques when using calibration markers and a software calibration tool, thus minimizing the source of error and improving the quality of correction.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33736621
doi: 10.1186/s12891-021-04084-0
pii: 10.1186/s12891-021-04084-0
pmc: PMC7976720
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
284Références
Gantsoudes GD, Fragomen AT, Rozbruch SR. Intraoperative measurement of mounting parameters for the Taylor spatial frame. J Orthop Trauma. 2010;24(4):258–62.
doi: 10.1097/BOT.0b013e3181c2f7f0
Simpson AL, Ma B, Slagel B, Borschneck DP, Ellis RE. Computer-assisted distraction osteogenesis by Ilizarov's method. Int J Med Robot. 2008;4(4):310–20.
doi: 10.1002/rcs.211
Kucukkaya M, Karakoyun O, Armagan R, Kuzgun U. Calculating the mounting parameters for Taylor spatial frame correction using computed tomography. J Orthop Trauma. 2011;25(7):449–52.
doi: 10.1097/BOT.0b013e3181ee40c5
Park DH, Bradish CF. An intraoperative method of calculating the mounting parameters for the Taylor spatial frame using the image intensifier. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2011;93(3):260–1.
doi: 10.1308/rcsann.2011.93.3.260b
Kanellopoulos AD, Mavrogenis AF, Kanellopoulos ND, Magnissalis EA, Papagelopoulos PJ. A guide frame for the Taylor spatial frame. J Orthop Trauma. 2009;23(7):537–40.
doi: 10.1097/BOT.0b013e3181a24021
Deakin DE, Rolands T, Taylor A. A frame-mounted X-ray guide for the Taylor spatial frame. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2007;89(7):729.
doi: 10.1308/rcsann.2007.89.7.729a
Wright J, Sabah SA, Patel S, Spence G. The silhouette technique: improving post-operative radiographs for planning of correction with a hexapod external fixator. Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr. 2017;12(2):127–31.
doi: 10.1007/s11751-017-0287-5
Seybold D, Gessmann J, Ozokyay L, Muhr G, Graf M. The Taylor spatial frame. Correction of posttraumatic deformities of the tibia and hindfoot. Unfallchirurg. 2008;111(12):985–6 988-995.
doi: 10.1007/s00113-008-1488-7
Rozbruch SR, Segal K, Ilizarov S, Fragomen AT, Ilizarov G. Does the Taylor spatial frame accurately correct tibial deformities? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468(5):1352–61.
doi: 10.1007/s11999-009-1161-7
Seybold D, Gessmann J, Ozokyay L, Backer H, Muhr G. Graf M: [deformity correction of post-traumatic tibial non-unions using the Taylor spatial frame]. Z Orthop Unfall. 2009;147(1):26–31.
doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1038978
Gessmann J, Seybold D, Baecker H, Muhr G. Graf M: [correction of supramalleolar deformities with the Taylor spatial frame]. Z Orthop Unfall. 2009;147(3):314–20.
doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1185299
Al-Sayyad MJ. Taylor spatial frame in the treatment of pediatric and adolescent tibial shaft fractures. J Pediatr Orthop. 2006;26(2):164–70.
doi: 10.1097/01.bpo.0000218522.05868.f9
Simpson AL, Ma B, Borschneck DP, Ellis RE. Computer-assisted deformity correction using the ilizarov method. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv. 2005;8(Pt 1):459–66.
pubmed: 16685878
Feldman DS, Shin SS, Madan S, Koval KJ. Correction of tibial malunion and nonunion with six-axis analysis deformity correction using the Taylor spatial frame. J Orthop Trauma. 2003;17(8):549–54.
doi: 10.1097/00005131-200309000-00002
Khakharia S, Bigman D, Fragomen AT, Pavlov H, Rozbruch SR. Comparison of PACS and hard-copy 51-inch radiographs for measuring leg length and deformity. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469(1):244–50.
doi: 10.1007/s11999-010-1460-z
Sokucu S, Demir B, Lapcin O, Yavuz U, Kabukcuoglu YS. Perioperative versus postoperative measurement of Taylor spatial frame mounting parameters. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2014;48(5):491–4.
doi: 10.3944/AOTT.2014.13.0080
Huang J, Zhu Y, Ma W, Zhang Z, Shi W, Lin J. A Novel Method for Accurate Preoperative Templating for Total Hip Arthroplasty Using a Biplanar Digital Radiographic (EOS) System. JB JS Open Access. 2020;5(4):e20.00078.
doi: 10.2106/JBJS.OA.20.00078
Ramme AJ, Fisher ND, Egol J, Chang G, Vigdorchik JM. Scaling marker position determines the accuracy of digital Templating for Total hip Arthroplasty. HSS J. 2018;14(1):55–9.
doi: 10.1007/s11420-017-9578-0
The B, Diercks RL, van Ooijen PM, van Horn JR. Comparison of analog and digital preoperative planning in total hip and knee arthroplasties. A prospective study of 173 hips and 65 total knees. Acta Orthop. 2005;76(1):78–84.
doi: 10.1080/00016470510030364
Archibeck MJ, Cummins T, Tripuraneni KR, Carothers JT, Murray-Krezan C, Hattab M, White RE Jr. Inaccuracies in the use of magnification markers in digital hip radiographs. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016;474(8):1812–7.
doi: 10.1007/s11999-016-4704-8
Brew CJ, Simpson PM, Whitehouse SL, Donnelly W, Crawford RW, Hubble MJ. Scaling digital radiographs for templating in total hip arthroplasty using conventional acetate templates independent of calibration markers. J Arthroplast. 2012;27(4):643–7.
doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2011.08.002
Wimsey S, Pickard R, Shaw G. Accurate scaling of digital radiographs of the pelvis. A prospective trial of two methods. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006;88(11):1508–12.
doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.88B11.18017
Heep H, Xu J, Lochteken C, Wedemeyer C. A simple and convenient method guide to determine the magnification of digital X-rays for preoperative planning in total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Rev. 2012;4(1):e12.
doi: 10.4081/or.2012.e12
Ferreira N, Birkholtz F. Radiographic analysis of hexapod external fixators: fundamental differences between the Taylor spatial frame and TrueLok-hex. J Med Eng Technol. 2015;39(3):173–6.
doi: 10.3109/03091902.2015.1025993
Ward TR, Schwarz B, Le BTN, Smith GCS, Molnar RB, Smith PN. Image intensifier distortion influences a surgeon's ability to aim guidewires during orthopaedic procedures. Skelet Radiol. 2019;48(9):1393–8.
doi: 10.1007/s00256-019-03171-7