Introduction: While conventional acetate x-rays came at a fixed size and magnification, digital x-rays are freely scalable on the screen and thus must be individually calibrated for surgical measurements (templating). The standard technique is calibration by a reference object (ruler, ball, coin) to be placed into the x-ray. In clinical practice, x-rays are often taken without a calibration object, the object may be malpositioned or the bucky system’s objectfilm distance is unknown to scale with a fixed magnification. Thus calibration based on an anatomic dimension would be a useful alternative in clinical practice.

In this study x-ray calibration using the femoral head diameter as derived by an anatomic formula is compared to the standard technique of using a calibration ball and acetate type fixed magnification.

Methods: In a prospective study three calibration Methods: were applied to post-op AP digital x-rays of 42 patients (m/f=12/30, height: 151–185cm) following primary total hip arthroplasty (ABG-II, 28mm heads) using a common templating software (Endomap): M1) 30mm metal ball lateral to the affected side at the height of the trochanter, M2) a fixed magnification of 121% (average of bucky system as derived from a pilot study) and M3) anatomic calibration by assigning to the natural femoral head of the contralateral side its diameter derived by an anatomic formula. The gender specific linear relationship between height (h [cm]) and the bony femoral head diameter (d [mm]) was obtained from a CT study (n=120): Males: d=0.156h+23.941, Females: d=0.154h+20.040). For each method applied by two independent observers, the implant’s metal head was measured and the relative error [%] calculated.

Results: The standard technique, calibration by a reference object produced a relative error (mean +/−SD) of 2.01+/−1.82% (max=7.9%). Fixed magnification had sign. less error at 1.41+/−1.3% (max=6.5%, p< 0.05). Anatomic calibration produced sign. higher errors at 2.77+/−1.96% (max=8.4%, p< 0.05). Inter-rater reliability was highest for the fixed magnification (r=0.93) and less for ball calibration (r=0.67) and anatomic calibration (r=0.52).

Discussion: It was shown once more that in THR fixed magnification of digital x-rays is on average more accurate and reliable than using a calibration object such as a ball. The theoretical benefit of individual calibration is lost by the variability in landmark palpation, object placement and patient movement though last can be limited by taping the object (e.g. coin) to the skin. Anatomic calibration based on the current formula cannot replace the use of calibration objects. However its error is within clinically tolerable ranges and it can be used when no calibration object is available or the system’s magnification is unknown. The error may be reduced by more accurate height measurements.

Polyethylene (PE) wear particle induced osteolysis remains a major cause of failure in total hip arthroplasty (THA), so that routine clinical measurement of wear stays important. Crosslinked PE promises very low wear rates so that measurement accuracy becomes increasingly important to distinguish alternative materials. The rising use of large femoral heads causes lower linear head penetration also requiring improved accuracy. Digital x-rays and wear measurement software have become standard, but during archiving and exchange of x-rays, image format, resolution or compression are often changed without knowing the effects on wear measurement. This study investigates the effect of digital x-ray resolution and compression on the accuracy of two software programs to measure wear.

The 8-year post-op digital x-rays of 24 THA patients (Stryker ABG-II, 28mm metal femoral head against Duration or conventional PE) were taken from the hospital PACS (Philips Diagnost H, AGFA ADC Solo, Siemens Medview) as DICOM at 5.1 MPix resolution. Images were converted to compression-free TIFF format using Irfanview V4.1. Wear (linear head penetration) was measured using Roman V1.7 and Martell Hip Analysis Suite 7.14. The x-rays were smoothened (Irfanview V4.1, Median Filter: 3) as recommended in literature for compatibility with Martell’s edge detection algorithm. Wear was measured twice by two independent observers at original format and resolution and then once by a single observer at three subsequently halved resolutions (2.6, 1.3, 0.65MPix) and three jpeg compressions (90%, 50%, 20%). Intra- and inter-observer reliability (R) was compared to the reliability of measuring manipulated images (Pearson’s r). The mean absolute wear differences (AD) were calculated versus the original x-ray.

The mean total wear was 0.98+/−0.59mm (0.3–2.4mm) equaling an annual of wear rate of 0.11mm/yr. Using Roman, Intra-R (0.97) and Inter-R (0.96) were high and AD low (0.10 and 0.20mm). Reduced image resolution caused the R to drop only slightly to 0.95 (2.6MPix), 0.92 (1.3MPix) and 0.94 (0.65MPix) while AD remained low (< 0.20mm). Also compression hardly affected R (90%:0.96, 50%: 0.94, 20%:0.93) nor AD (< 0.20mm). Using Martell Intra-R (0.99) and Inter-R (0.87) were also high but dropped with reducing resolution (0.82, 0.72, 0.34, AD: 0.4–1.1mm) but hardly with increased compression (0.95, 0.92, 0.94, AD< 0.20mm).

Low resolution and high compression do not have to be critical for wear measurement accuracy and reliability when edge detection is performed by a trained human eye. This way interpolating the ball and cup perimeters and locating their centers can be performed at accuracy below pixel size (ca. 0.40mm at 0.65MPix). Automatic edge detection is less robust to reducing resolution but performs at high compression. If image size needs to be reduced compression is preferable to reducing resolution.