Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34249655›Full record

ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2021

Comparison of 3D and 2D characterization of spinal geometry from biplanar X-rays: a large cohort study.

Zongshan Hu, Claudio Vergari, Laurent Gajny, Zhen Liu, Tsz-Ping Lam, Zezhang Zhu, Yong Qiu, Gene C W Man, Kwong-Hang Yeung, Winnie C W Chu and 2 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Zongshan HuDepartment of Spine Surgery, Drum Tower Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, Nanjing, China.
Claudio VergariArts et Métiers Institute of Technology, Université Sorbonne Paris Nord, Institut de Biomécanique Humaine Georges Charpak (IBHGC), HESAM Université, Paris, France.
Laurent GajnyArts et Métiers Institute of Technology, Université Sorbonne Paris Nord, Institut de Biomécanique Humaine Georges Charpak (IBHGC), HESAM Université, Paris, France.
Zhen LiuDepartment of Spine Surgery, Drum Tower Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, Nanjing, China.
Tsz-Ping LamDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, The Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Zezhang ZhuDepartment of Spine Surgery, Drum Tower Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, Nanjing, China.
Yong QiuDepartment of Spine Surgery, Drum Tower Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, Nanjing, China.
Gene C W ManDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, The Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Kwong-Hang YeungThe Joint Scoliosis Research Center of the Chinese University of Hong Kong-Nanjing University, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Winnie C W ChuThe Joint Scoliosis Research Center of the Chinese University of Hong Kong-Nanjing University, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Jack C Y ChengDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, The Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Wafa SkalliArts et Métiers Institute of Technology, Université Sorbonne Paris Nord, Institut de Biomécanique Humaine Georges Charpak (IBHGC), HESAM Université, Paris, France.
Chinese University of Hong Kong · CNPrince of Wales Hospital · CNNanjing Drum Tower Hospital · CNInstitut de Biomécanique Humaine Georges Charpak · FRSorbonne Université · FRUniversité Sorbonne Paris Nord · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBiplanar X-ray system providing anteroposterior and sagittal plane with an ultra-low radiation dose and in weight-bearing position is increasingly used for spine imaging. The original three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction method from biplanar X-rays has been widely used for clinical parameters, however, the main issue is that manual adjustments of the 3D model was quite time-consuming and limited to thoracolumbar spine. A quasi-automated 3D reconstruction method of the spine from cervical vertebra to pelvis was proposed, which proved fast and accurate in 57 patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. The aim of this study was to compare the newly developed technique of quasi-automatic 3D measurement with classical 2D measurements in a large cohort.

methodsA total of 494 adults with biplanar EOS X-ray scanning were included in this study and divided into health and deformity group according to the presence of spinal deformity. The proposed method of quasi-automatic 3D measurement was applied to all these subjects. The radiographic parameters included: thoracic kyphosis (TK), lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), sagittal vertical axis (SVA), T1 pelvic angle (TPA) in sagittal plane, and cobb angle in coronal plane. Comparison was made between quasi-automatic and manual measurement.

resultsThe mean age was 53.7±19.9 years old. In the whole population, the mean differences between the two methods were 3.9° for TK (30.5°±9.9°

conclusionsIn conclusion, this ergonomic and efficient quasi-automatic method for full spine proved fast and accurate measurement in a large population, which showed great potential in extensive clinical application.

Indexed as

automatic measurementsagittal parameterScoliosisspinethree-dimensional reconstruction (3D reconstruction)

Identifiers

PMID34249655
PMCPMC8250026
OpenAlexW3158569257

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.