Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

THE ACCURACY OF RADIOGRAPHS IN MEASURING FEMORAL NECK-SHAFT ANGULATION AND FEMORAL COMPONENT ANGULATION FOLLOWING HIP RESURFACING ARTHROPLASTY



Abstract

To assess the accuracy of plain digitised radiographic images for measurement of neck-shaft and stem-shaft angles in hip resurfacing arthroplasty.

Fifteen patients having undergone hip resurfacing arthroplasty with the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) were selected at random. Digital radiographs were analyzed by three observers. Each observer measured the femoral neck-shaft angles (NSA) of the pre-operative and stem-shaft angles (SSA) of the postoperative radiographs on two separate occasions spanning one week. The effect of femur position on SSA measured by digital radiographs was also analyzed. A BHR prosthesis was cemented into a third generation Sawbone composite femur. Radiographs were taken with the synthetic specimen positioned in varying angles of both flexion and external rotation in increments of 10° ranging from 0° to 90°.

The mean intraobserver difference in measured angle was 3.13° (SD 2.37°, 95% CI +/−4.64°) for the NSA group and 1.49° (SD 2.28°, 95% CI +/−4.47°) for the SSA group. The intraclass correlation coefficient for the NSA group was 0.616 and for the SSA group was 0.855. Flexion of the synthetic femur of twenty degrees resulted in a five degree discrepancy in measured SSA and flexion of forty degrees resulted in a thirteen degree discrepancy. External rotation of the synthetic specimen of twenty and forty degrees resulted in a three and nine degree discrepancy in measured SSA, respectively.

Patient malposition during radiographic imaging can contribute to erroneous NSA and SSA results. Significant intra- and inter-observer variation was noted in the measurement of neck shaft angle however, variation was less marked for measurement of stem shaft angle.

Correspondence should be addressed to: Cynthia Vezina, Communications Manager, COA, 4150-360 Ste. Catherine St. West, Westmount, QC H3Z 2Y5, Canada