ArticleFoot & ankle orthopaedics2022
Translation of 3D Anatomy to 2D Radiographic Angle Measurements in the Ankle Joint: Validity and Reliability.
Article in Foot & ankle orthopaedics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The objective consisted of 2 elements, primarily to define 2 bone geometry variations of the ankle that may be of prognostic value on ankle instability and secondly to translate these bone variations from a 3D model to a simple 2D radiographic measurement for clinical use. Methods: The 3D tibial and talar shape differences derived from earlier studies were translated to two 2D radiographic parameters: the medial malleolar height angle (MMHA) and talar convexity angle (TCA) respectively to ensure clinical use. To assess validity, the MMHA and TCA were measured on 3D polygons derived from lower leg computed tomographic (CT) scans and 2D digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) of these polygons. To assess reliability, the MMHA and TCA were measured on standard radiographs by 2 observers calculating the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: The 3D angle measurements on the polygons showed substantial to excellent agreement with the 2D measurements on DRR for both the MMHA (ICC 0.84-0.93) and TCA (ICC 0.88-0.96). The interobserver reliability was moderate with an ICC of 0.58 and an ICC of 0.64 for both the MMHA and TCA, respectively. The intraobserver reliability was excellent with an ICC of 0.96 and 0.97 for the MMHA and the TCA, respectively. Conclusion: Two newly defined radiographic parameters (MMHA and TCA) are valid and can be assessed with excellent intraobserver reliability on standard radiographs. The interobserver reliability was moderate and indicates training is required to ensure uniformity in measurement technique. The current method may be used to translate more variations in bone shape prior to implementation in clinical practice. Level of Evidence: Level III, cohort study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.