Glenoid bone loss is a significant problem in the management of shoulder instability. The threshold at which the bone loss is considered “critical” requiring bony reconstruction has steadily dropped and is now approximately 15%. This necessitates accurate measurement in order that the correct operation is performed. CT scanning is the most commonly used modality and there are a number of techniques described to measure the bone loss however few have been validated. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of the most commonly used techniques for measuring glenoid bone loss on CT. Anatomically accurate models with known glenoid diameter and degree of bone loss were used to determine the mathematical and statistical accuracy of six of the most commonly described techniques (relative diameter, linear ipsilateral circle of best fit (COBF), linear contralateral COBF, Pico, Sugaya, and circle line methods). The models were prepared at 13.8%, 17.6%, and 22.9% bone loss. Sequential CT scans were taken and randomized. Blinded reviewers made repeated measurements using the different techniques with a threshold for theoretical bone grafting set at 15%.Aims
Methods
Degenerative spondylosis (DS) represents a challenging condition to diagnose and treat. There are multiple modalities to investigate DS including X-ray, MRI and CT, but symptoms may not be equivocal to DS to support the clinical findings. The investigation of metastases commonly utilises SPECT/CT for identification of areas of increased osteoblastic activity to denote disease. The aim of the study was to analyse the prevalence of asymptomatic DS in a consecutive hospital cohort of oncology patients who had SPECT/CT for investigation of metastases. Oncology patients who underwent SPECT/CT at St. George's Hospital were analysed between 2015–2019. Exclusion criteria: back pain, inflammatory disorders, metastases, trauma, infection. Radiology reports were examined for DS and anatomical distribution of tracer uptake.Introduction
Methods
The advent of EOS imaging has offered clinicians the opportunity to image the whole skeleton in the anatomical standing position with a smaller radiation dose than standard spine roentgenograms. It is known as the fifth modality of imaging. Current NICE guidelines do not recommend EOS scans over x-rays citing: “The evidence indicated insufficient patient benefit in terms of radiation dose reduction and increased throughput to justify its cost”. We retrospectively reviewed 103 adult and 103 paediatric EOS scans of standing whole spines including shoulders and pelvis for those undergoing investigation for spinal deformity in a tertiary spinal centre in the UK. We matched this against a retrospective control group of 103 adults and 103 children who underwent traditional roentgenograms whole spine imaging at the same centre during the same timeframe. We aimed to compare the average radiation dose of AP and lateral images between the two modalities. We utilised a validated lifetime risk of cancer calculator (Background
Methods
