ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2023
Calibration of magnification in two-dimensional low-dose full-body imaging for preoperative planning of total hip arthroplasty.
Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- AI-driven 3D virtual surgical planning in total hip arthroplasty: a machine learning approach for precision implant positioning and improved clinical outcomes.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPreoperative planning of total hip arthroplasty (THA) using two-dimensional low-dose (2DLD) full-body imaging has gained popularity in recent years. The low-dose imaging system is said to produce a calibrated image with constant 1:1 magnification. However, the planning software used in conjunction with those images may introduce variations in the degree of magnification in 2DLD imaging, and this has not yet been investigated. The purpose of the present study was to quantify any variation in 2DLD image to assess the need for image calibration when using conventional planning software.
methodsPostoperative 2DLD images from 137 patients were retrospectively evaluated. Only patients who underwent THA for primary osteoarthritis were included in the study cohort. The femoral head diameter was measured by two independent observers using both Orthoview™ and TraumaCad™ planning software programs. Actual sizes of the femoral head implants were extracted from surgical reports to calculate image magnification. Magnification measurement reliability was calculated with the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) index.
resultsImage magnification varied among cases (mean 133%, range 129-135%). There was no statistical difference in mean image magnification among the various implant sizes (p = 0.8). Mean observer and inter-observer reliability was rated excellent.
conclusionTHA planning with 2DLD imaging is subject to variation in magnification as analyzed with conventional planning software in this series. This finding is of paramount importance for surgeons using 2DLD imaging in preparation for THA since errors in magnification could affect the accuracy of preoperative planning and ultimately the clinical outcome.
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.