ArticleEuropean journal of medical research2025
Ultrasonic measurement of acetabular alpha angle to evaluate developmental dysplasia of the hip: differences between AIUM guideline and European consensus.
Article in European journal of medical research, 2025. 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.
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.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo clarify the difference between the alpha angles measured by European method and by AIUM method. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this prospective study, infants less than 6-month-old with clinical suspicion of DDH were enrolled from the pediatric outpatient service in a large provincial teaching hospital from October 2022 to October 2023. The hips were examined according to the protocols described by AIUM guideline and by European consensus. The acetabular alpha angle was measured on the standard sections. Statistically significant difference between groups was determined by using a paired-sample t test.
resultsA total of 225 infants (median age, 4.0 months [interquartile range, 3.3-5.2 months]; 104 boys) were enrolled into the study. The mean value of alpha angle measured by AIUM method (62.1°; 95% CI 61.7, 62.4) was smaller than that by European method (63.4°; 95% CI 63.1, 63.7) (P < 0.0001). The 95% limits of agreement between alpha angles measured by the two methods were - 6.6 to 9.2 degree. Alpha angle measured by AIUM method could diagnose DDH with low sensitivity (56% [9 of 16 hips; 95% CI 31, 79]) and specificity (78% [300 of 384 hips; 95% CI 74, 82]) with Graf's technique as a reference standard. The position of transducer arranged on the skin of infant by AIUM method was 1.6 ± 0.3 cm back to the position by European method.
conclusionAlpha angle measured by AIUM method is smaller than that by European method and should not be applied to Graf typing of DDH.
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.