ReviewSkeletal radiology2023
Weight-bearing cone-beam CT: the need for standardised acquisition protocols and measurements to fulfill high expectations-a review of the literature.
Review in Skeletal radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 15 papers.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- 3-D landmarking repeatability emphasizes challenges in scan positioning during weight bearing CT of the knee.Osteoarthritis imaging · 2026Article
- Increased medial anterior tibial translation and reduced tibiofemoral rotation are observed during weight bearing in anterior cruciate ligament-deficient knees: A paired within-subject imaging analysis.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Impact of weight-bearing on foot shape: a geometric and morphometric assessment using principal polynomial shape analysis.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Weight-bearing computed tomography in knee pathologies: current evidence and future perspectives.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Review
- Comparative evaluation of weight-bearing cone beam CT arthrography and supine 3T MRI in knee osteoarthritis.Osteoarthritis imaging · 2025Article
- Utility of Weight-Bearing Computed Tomography in the Postoperative Assessment of Ankle Fractures.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Inducible displacement of cementless total knee arthroplasty components with conventional and weight-bearing CT-based radiostereometric analysis.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2025Article
- Radiologic evaluation of ankle fracture malunions of the fibula.Skeletal radiology · 2024Review
- Trends in the Use of Weightbearing Computed Tomography.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Morphological changes in flatfoot: a 3D analysis using weight-bearing CT scans.BMC medical imaging · 2024Article
- Quantitative assessment of the knee joint from weight bearing computed tomography.Osteoarthritis imaging · 2024Article
- Reliability and correlation of weight-bearing cone beam CT and Foot Posture Index (FPI) for measurements of foot posture: a test-retest study.Skeletal radiology · 2023Article
- 3-D joint space mapping at the ankle from weight-bearing CT: reproducibility, repeatability, and challenges for standardisation.European radiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Weight bearing CT (WBCT) of the lower extremity is gaining momentum in evaluation of the foot/ankle and knee. A growing number of international studies use WBCT, which is promising for improving our understanding of anatomy and biomechanics during natural loading of the lower extremity. However, we believe there is risk of excessive enthusiasm for WBCT leading to premature application of the technique, before sufficiently robust protocols are in place e.g. standardised limb positioning and imaging planes, choice of anatomical landmarks and image slices used for individual measurements. Lack of standardisation could limit benefits from introducing WBCT in research and clinical practice because useful imaging information could become obscured. Measurements of bones and joints on WBCT are influenced by joint positioning and magnitude of loading, factors that need to be considered within a 3-D coordinate system. A proportion of WBCT studies examine inter- and intraobserver reproducibility for different radiological measurements in the knee or foot with reproducibility generally reported to be high. However, investigations of test-retest reproducibility are still lacking. Thus, the current ability to evaluate, e.g. the effects of surgery or structural disease progression, is questionable. This paper presents an overview of the relevant literature on WBCT in the lower extremity with an emphasis on factors that may affect measurement reproducibility in the foot/ankle and knee. We discuss the caveats of performing WBCT without consensus on imaging procedures and measurements.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36350387What 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.