ArticleOrthopaedic surgery2022
Reliability and Validity Analysis of Pelvic Sagittal Inclination Calculated by Inverse Cosine Function Method on Pelvic Anteroposterior Radiographs.
Article in Orthopaedic surgery, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveEvaluation of sagittal pelvic tilt is significant for hip surgeons. However, the accurate measurement of pelvic sagittal inclination (PSI) is still a challenge. The objective of this study is to propose a new method for measurement of PSI from pelvic anteroposterior radiograph based on the inverse cosine function obtained from individualized pelvic model.
methodsCollecting the imaging data of 30 patients with both pelvic CT and full-length spine radiographs. Establishing pelvic model by customized 3D reconstruction software. The length of three groups of longitudinal and transverse line segments (A'p and B') were measured from full-length spine anteroposterior radiographs. The corresponding anatomical parameters, including A, B, b, ∠α, ∠γ, were measured and calculated on the same patient's pelvic model. The estimated PSI (ePSI) based on three groups of anatomical landmarks, including ePSI-1, ePSI-2, and ePSI-3, were calculated by equation,
resultsePSI-1 and ePSI-2 showed excellent intra-observer reliability (0.921-0.997, p < 0.001) and inter-observer reliability (0.801-0.977, p < 0.001). ePSI-3 had a fair inter-observer reliability (0.239-0.823, p < 0.001). ePSI-1 showed the strongest correlation with aPSI (r = 0.917, p < 0.001). Mean (maximum) absolute difference of ePSI-1, ePSI-2, and ePSI-3 is 2.62° (7.42°), 4.23° (13.78°), and 7.74° (31.47°), respectively. The proportion of cases with absolute difference less than 5° in three groups were 86.7% (ePSI-1), 66.7% (ePSI-2), 56.7% (ePSI-3).
conclusionThis new method based on inverse cosine function has good reliability and validity when used in the evaluation of PSI on pelvic anteroposterior radiographs.
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.