ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2025
Measurement inaccuracies in X-ray planning of deformity correction using a new hexapod calibration device: an experimental approach with CT-correlation.
Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 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.
- Postoperative X-ray and CT measurement of mounting parameter accuracy for hexapod external fixator in treating tibial fractures: a retrospective study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHexapod systems are accurate devices to perform deformity correction. Crucial to achieving the desirable result is the precise determination of the mounting and deformity parameters. Smith + Nephew (London, UK) developed a calibration device for their hexapod system TSF (Taylor Spatial Frame) called Beacon, which is directly mounted to the reference ring. The software indicates the Beacon in X-rays and calculates the whole hexapod construct. However, we still can find inaccuracies after completing the correction plan by the software. Since the software calibrates the construct with the bone in the center of the ring, the question arises as to whether different positions of the bone within the construct influence the calculated parameters. MATERIALS AND
methodsA tibial artificial bone (Sawbones, Vashon Island, USA) was mounted with the TSF. Iron beads were attached to define reference distances. The test setup included five different positions of the bone. X-rays and CTs (computed tomography) were performed and the distances were measured. The accuracy of the measurements of the X-rays and the CT were compared when having the bone in different positions.
resultsMeasurements were dependent on the position of the bone in relation to the center of the ring. If the bone is closer to the detector than the center of the ring, the measured distance is shorter and vice versa. Resultingly, the measured total length of the bone in X-rays varied from the true length between ± 26 mm (7%). In contrast, measurements by CT showed much less variability.
conclusionWhen using X-ray planning, care must be taken if the bone is not centered in the reference ring. Measurement inaccuracies of up to 7-10% may occur. CTs give more accurate measurements regardless of the bone position. These findings should be taken into account if the limb cannot be centered in the reference ring of the hexapod system.
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.