SynthesisSkeletal radiology2024
"The accuracy of the EOS imaging system to assess hip abnormalities in adolescents and adults:" a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Skeletal radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- What Is the Functional Spinopelvic Relationship in Three Dimensions? A CT and EOS Study.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2025Article
- CORR Insights®: Is Quantitative Radiographic Measurement of Acetabular Version Reliable in Anteverted and Retroverted Hips?Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2024Article
- Distances and angles in standing long-leg radiographs: comparing conventional radiography, digital radiography, and EOS.Skeletal radiology · 2024Article
- Partial tooth formation diagnosed eight years after an extraction of the maxillary third molar germ in a complete crown formation stadium: A case report.International journal of surgery case reports · 2024Article
- EOSedge vs. standard digital radiography: image quality and dose exposure in hip-focused scanning.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Article
- EOS® is reliable to evaluate spinopelvic parameters: a validation study.BMC medical imaging · 2024Article
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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo determine the accuracy of the EOS imaging system compared to the gold standard computed tomography (CT) scan, for the measurement of native and postoperative/prosthetic hip parameters in adolescents and adults.
methodsMedline, Cochrane Systematic Review, and Web of Science databases were searched to obtain relevant articles published between January 1964 and February 2021. All articles published in English. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed according to the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome (PICO) framework. Three reviewers independently assessed the quality of included studies using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) checklist. A narrative synthesis of the articles and a meta-analysis were conducted. The heterogeneity exhibited by the effect sizes was obtained using a forest plot, the Q statistic and the I2 index. Reliability coefficients were transformed into Fisher's Z to normalise their distribution and stabilise the variances. For each meta-analysis, an effect size (average reliability coefficient) and a 95% confidence interval were calculated and presented in a forest plot. The amount of radiation dose between modalities was compared.
resultsThe search retrieved 75 articles, six of which met inclusion and exclusion criteria. The meta-analysis included five of these six studies (sample size from 20 to 90). Comparing EOS and CT, the estimated average correlation (effect size) for combined studies was significantly high (r = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.78 to 0.88, p-value < 0.001). With respect to Pearson's correlation between EOS and CT, the estimated average correlation for combined studies was significantly high (r = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.80 to 0.90, p-value < 0.001). Average radiation dose for EOS was 0.18 ± 0.05 mGy for the anteroposterior view (AP) and 0.45 ± 0.08 mGy for the lateral view; and for CT was 8.4 to 15.6 mGy.
conclusionThe EOS imaging system has a high correlation with CT for preoperative and postoperative/prosthetic hip measurements, with considerably lower irradiation of patients.
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.