ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2024
Automatic measurement of lower limb alignment in portable devices based on deep learning for knee osteoarthritis.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of aerobic exercises for knee osteoarthritis: a network meta analysis of randomized clinical trials.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Pooled it
- Deep Learning-Based Full-Process Automatic CPAK Classification System and Its Application in the Analysis of Alignment Outcomes Before and After Knee Arthroplasty.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in the biomechanics of knee osteoarthritis: biomechanical phenotyping, risk stratification, diagnosis, treatment and clinical translation-a narrative review.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Automated radiographic assessment of lower limb alignment using deep learning in a data-constrained clinical setting.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Use of Artificial Intelligence on Imaging and Preoperatory Planning of the Knee Joint: A Scoping Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Can Artificial Intelligence Reliably and Accurately Measure Lower Limb Alignment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2025Review
- HKA-Net: clinically-adapted deep learning for automated measurement of hip-knee-ankle angle on lower limb radiography for knee osteoarthritis assessment.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 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
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFor knee osteoarthritis patients, analyzing alignment of lower limbs is essential for therapy, which is currently measured from standing long-leg radiographs of anteroposterior X-ray (LLR) manually. To address the time wasting, poor reproducibility and inconvenience of use caused by existing methods, we present an automated measurement model in portable devices for assessing knee alignment from LLRs.
methodWe created a model and trained it with 837 conforming LLRs, and tested it using 204 LLRs without duplicates in a portable device. Both manual and model measurements were conducted independently, then we recorded knee alignment parameters such as Hip knee ankle angle (HKA), Joint line convergence angle (JCLA), Anatomical mechanical angle (AMA), mechanical Lateral distal femoral angle (mLDFA), mechanical Medial proximal tibial angle (mMPTA), and the time required. We evaluated the model's performance compared with manual results in various metrics.
resultIn both the validation and test sets, the average mean radial errors were 2.778 and 2.447 (P<0.05). The test results for native knee joints showed that 92.22%, 79.38%, 87.94%, 79.82%, and 80.16% of the joints reached angle deviation<1° for HKA, JCLA, AMA, mLDFA, and mMPTA. Additionally, for joints with prostheses, 90.14%, 93.66%, 86.62%, 83.80%, and 85.92% of the joints reached that. The Chi-square test did not reveal any significant differences between the manual and model measurements in subgroups (P>0.05). Furthermore, the Bland-Altman 95% limits of agreement were less than ± 2° for HKA, JCLA, AMA, and mLDFA, and slightly more than ± 2 degrees for mMPTA.
conclusionThe automatic measurement tool can assess the alignment of lower limbs in portable devices for knee osteoarthritis patients. The results are reliable, reproducible, and time-saving.
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.