ArticleSurgery in practice and science2026
Impact of coordinate system alignment on CT-based distal radius morphometry relevant to surgical planning: A bilateral comparative study.
Article in Surgery in practice and science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Computed tomography-based three-dimensional morphometric analysis is increasingly used for surgical planning and contralateral templating in distal radius surgery. However, the influence of coordinate system alignment on morphometric measurements has not been systematically evaluated. Methods: A cross-sectional imaging study was performed using CT-derived three-dimensional models from 83 healthy Vietnamese adults (166 distal radii). Distal radius width and thickness were measured using two coordinate systems: the default software bounding-box orientation and an anatomically axis-corrected system aligned with the distal radius longitudinal axis. Measurements were compared using paired analyses, and inter-observer reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients. Results: Width measurements showed no statistically significant differences between the two coordinate systems. In contrast, thickness measurements were consistently greater after anatomical axis correction, with median differences of 0.18 mm on the right and 0.15 mm on the left (both p < 0.001). Inter-observer reliability was excellent for all measurements (ICC = 1.0), reflecting the high reproducibility of the standardized coordinate alignment workflow. Conclusion: Anatomical coordinate system alignment introduces small but consistent differences in CT-based distal radius morphometric measurements, particularly for thickness estimation. Although the absolute differences were small, standardizing coordinate system alignment may improve the reproducibility and comparability of CT-derived measurements used for morphometric analysis, preoperative planning, and contralateral templating. Future CT-based morphometric studies should explicitly describe the coordinate system used for measurement.
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.