ArticlePloS one2024
An exploratory study of the impact of CT slice thickness and inter-rater variability on anatomical accuracy of malunited distal radius models and surgical guides for corrective osteotomy.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- High-Fidelity Measurement-Based Detection Values and Roles of Three-Dimensional Joint Space Width in Evaluation of Knee Osteoarthritis.Orthopaedic surgery · 2026Article
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
High-resolution CT images are essential in clinical practice to accurately replicate patient anatomy for 3D virtual surgical planning and designing patient-specific surgical guides. These technologies are commonly used in corrective osteotomy of the distal radius. This study evaluated how the virtual radius models and the surgical guides' surface that is in contact with the bone vary between experienced raters. Further, the discrepancies from the reference radius of surgical guides and radius models created from CT images with slice thicknesses larger than the reference standard of 0.625mm were assessed. Maximum overlap with radius model was measured for guides, and absolute average distance error was measured for radius models. The agreement between the lower-resolution guides surface and the raters' guide surface was evaluated. The average inter-rater guide surface overlap was -0.11mm [95% CI: -0.13-0.09]. The surface of surgical guides designed on CT images with a 1mm slice thickness deviated from the reference radius within the inter-rater range (0.03mm). For slice thicknesses of 1.25mm and 1.5mm, the average guide surface overlap was 0.12mm and 0.15mm, respectively. The average inter-rater radius surface variability was 0.03mm [95% CI: 0.025-0.035]. The discrepancy from the reference of all radius models created from CT images with a slice thickness larger than the reference slice thickness was notably larger than the inter-rater variability but, excluding one case, did not exceed 0.2mm. The results suggest that 1mm CT images are suitable for surgical guide design. While 1.25mm slices are commonly used for virtual planning in hand and forearm surgery, slices larger than 1mm may approach the limit of clinical acceptability. Discrepancies in radius models were below 1mm, likely below clinical relevance.
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.