Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 20 of 30
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 104-B, Issue 8 | Pages 909 - 910
1 Aug 2022
Vigdorchik JM Jang SJ Taunton MJ Haddad FS


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 103-B, Issue 9 | Pages 1442 - 1448
1 Sep 2021
McDonnell JM Evans SR McCarthy L Temperley H Waters C Ahern D Cunniffe G Morris S Synnott K Birch N Butler JS

In recent years, machine learning (ML) and artificial neural networks (ANNs), a particular subset of ML, have been adopted by various areas of healthcare. A number of diagnostic and prognostic algorithms have been designed and implemented across a range of orthopaedic sub-specialties to date, with many positive results. However, the methodology of many of these studies is flawed, and few compare the use of ML with the current approach in clinical practice. Spinal surgery has advanced rapidly over the past three decades, particularly in the areas of implant technology, advanced surgical techniques, biologics, and enhanced recovery protocols. It is therefore regarded an innovative field. Inevitably, spinal surgeons will wish to incorporate ML into their practice should models prove effective in diagnostic or prognostic terms. The purpose of this article is to review published studies that describe the application of neural networks to spinal surgery and which actively compare ANN models to contemporary clinical standards allowing evaluation of their efficacy, accuracy, and relatability. It also explores some of the limitations of the technology, which act to constrain the widespread adoption of neural networks for diagnostic and prognostic use in spinal care. Finally, it describes the necessary considerations should institutions wish to incorporate ANNs into their practices. In doing so, the aim of this review is to provide a practical approach for spinal surgeons to understand the relevant aspects of neural networks.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(9):1442–1448.


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 7, Issue 3 | Pages 223 - 225
1 Mar 2018
Jones LD Golan D Hanna SA Ramachandran M


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 102-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1574 - 1581
2 Nov 2020
Zhang S Sun J Liu C Fang J Xie H Ning B

Aims. The diagnosis of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) is challenging owing to extensive variation in paediatric pelvic anatomy. Artificial intelligence (AI) may represent an effective diagnostic tool for DDH. Here, we aimed to develop an anteroposterior pelvic radiograph deep learning system for diagnosing DDH in children and analyze the feasibility of its application. Methods. In total, 10,219 anteroposterior pelvic radiographs were retrospectively collected from April 2014 to December 2018. Clinicians labelled each radiograph using a uniform standard method. Radiographs were grouped according to age and into ‘dislocation’ (dislocation and subluxation) and ‘non-dislocation’ (normal cases and those with dysplasia of the acetabulum) groups based on clinical diagnosis. The deep learning system was trained and optimized using 9,081 radiographs; 1,138 test radiographs were then used to compare the diagnoses made by deep learning system and clinicians. The accuracy of the deep learning system was determined using a receiver operating characteristic curve, and the consistency of acetabular index measurements was evaluated using Bland-Altman plots. Results. In all, 1,138 patients (242 males; 896 females; mean age 1.5 years (SD 1.79; 0 to 10) were included in this study. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, and specificity of the deep learning system for diagnosing hip dislocation were 0.975, 276/289 (95.5%), and 1,978/1,987 (99.5%), respectively. Compared with clinical diagnoses, the Bland-Altman 95% limits of agreement for acetabular index, as determined by the deep learning system from the radiographs of non-dislocated and dislocated hips, were -3.27° - 2.94° and -7.36° - 5.36°, respectively (p < 0.001). Conclusion. The deep learning system was highly consistent, more convenient, and more effective for diagnosing DDH compared with clinician-led diagnoses. Deep learning systems should be considered for analysis of anteroposterior pelvic radiographs when diagnosing DDH. The deep learning system will improve the current artificially complicated screening referral process. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(11):1574–1581


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 12, Issue 5 | Pages 42 - 45
1 Oct 2023

The October 2023 Children’s orthopaedics Roundup. 360. looks at: Outcomes of open reduction in children with developmental hip dislocation: a multicentre experience over a decade; A torn discoid lateral meniscus impacts lower-limb alignment regardless of age; Who benefits from allowing the physis to grow in slipped capital femoral epiphysis?; Consensus guidelines on the management of musculoskeletal infection affecting children in the UK; Diagnosis of developmental dysplasia of the hip by ultrasound imaging using deep learning; Outcomes at a mean of 13 years after proximal humeral fracture during adolescence; Clubfeet treated according to Ponseti at four years; Controlled ankle movement boot provides improved outcomes with lower complications than short leg walking cast


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 12, Issue 5 | Pages 34 - 36
1 Oct 2023

The October 2023 Spine Roundup. 360. looks at: Cutting through surgical smoke: the science of cleaner air in spinal operations; Unlocking success: key factors in thoracic spine decompression and fusion for ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament; Deep learning algorithm for identifying cervical cord compression due to degenerative canal stenosis on radiography; Surgeon experience influences robotics learning curve for minimally invasive lumbar fusion; Decision-making algorithm for the surgical treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis of L4/L5; Response to preoperative steroid injections predicts surgical outcomes in patients undergoing fusion for isthmic spondylolisthesis


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 12, Issue 2 | Pages 24 - 28
1 Apr 2023

The April 2023 Wrist & Hand Roundup. 360. looks at: MRI-based classification for acute scaphoid injuries: the OxSMART; Deep learning for detection of scaphoid fractures?; Ulnar shortening osteotomy in adolescents; Cost-utility analysis of thumb carpometacarpal resection arthroplasty; Arthritis of the wrist following scaphoid fracture nonunion; Extensor hood injuries in elite boxers; Risk factors for reoperation after flexor tendon repair; Nonoperative versus operative treatment for displaced finger metacarpal shaft fractures


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 3, Issue 10 | Pages 767 - 776
5 Oct 2022
Jang SJ Kunze KN Brilliant ZR Henson M Mayman DJ Jerabek SA Vigdorchik JM Sculco PK

Aims. Accurate identification of the ankle joint centre is critical for estimating tibial coronal alignment in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of the current study was to leverage artificial intelligence (AI) to determine the accuracy and effect of using different radiological anatomical landmarks to quantify mechanical alignment in relation to a traditionally defined radiological ankle centre. Methods. Patients with full-limb radiographs from the Osteoarthritis Initiative were included. A sub-cohort of 250 radiographs were annotated for landmarks relevant to knee alignment and used to train a deep learning (U-Net) workflow for angle calculation on the entire database. The radiological ankle centre was defined as the midpoint of the superior talus edge/tibial plafond. Knee alignment (hip-knee-ankle angle) was compared against 1) midpoint of the most prominent malleoli points, 2) midpoint of the soft-tissue overlying malleoli, and 3) midpoint of the soft-tissue sulcus above the malleoli. Results. A total of 932 bilateral full-limb radiographs (1,864 knees) were measured at a rate of 20.63 seconds/image. The knee alignment using the radiological ankle centre was accurate against ground truth radiologist measurements (inter-class correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.99 (0.98 to 0.99)). Compared to the radiological ankle centre, the mean midpoint of the malleoli was 2.3 mm (SD 1.3) lateral and 5.2 mm (SD 2.4) distal, shifting alignment by 0.34. o. (SD 2.4. o. ) valgus, whereas the midpoint of the soft-tissue sulcus was 4.69 mm (SD 3.55) lateral and 32.4 mm (SD 12.4) proximal, shifting alignment by 0.65. o. (SD 0.55. o. ) valgus. On the intermalleolar line, measuring a point at 46% (SD 2%) of the intermalleolar width from the medial malleoli (2.38 mm medial adjustment from midpoint) resulted in knee alignment identical to using the radiological ankle centre. Conclusion. The current study leveraged AI to create a consistent and objective model that can estimate patient-specific adjustments necessary for optimal landmark usage in extramedullary and computer-guided navigation for tibial coronal alignment to match radiological planning. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(10):767–776


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 5, Issue 2 | Pages 101 - 108
6 Feb 2024
Jang SJ Kunze KN Casey JC Steele JR Mayman DJ Jerabek SA Sculco PK Vigdorchik JM

Aims. Distal femoral resection in conventional total knee arthroplasty (TKA) utilizes an intramedullary guide to determine coronal alignment, commonly planned for 5° of valgus. However, a standard 5° resection angle may contribute to malalignment in patients with variability in the femoral anatomical and mechanical axis angle. The purpose of the study was to leverage deep learning (DL) to measure the femoral mechanical-anatomical axis angle (FMAA) in a heterogeneous cohort. Methods. Patients with full-limb radiographs from the Osteoarthritis Initiative were included. A DL workflow was created to measure the FMAA and validated against human measurements. To reflect potential intramedullary guide placement during manual TKA, two different FMAAs were calculated either using a line approximating the entire diaphyseal shaft, and a line connecting the apex of the femoral intercondylar sulcus to the centre of the diaphysis. The proportion of FMAAs outside a range of 5.0° (SD 2.0°) was calculated for both definitions, and FMAA was compared using univariate analyses across sex, BMI, knee alignment, and femur length. Results. The algorithm measured 1,078 radiographs at a rate of 12.6 s/image (2,156 unique measurements in 3.8 hours). There was no significant difference or bias between reader and algorithm measurements for the FMAA (p = 0.130 to 0.563). The FMAA was 6.3° (SD 1.0°; 25% outside range of 5.0° (SD 2.0°)) using definition one and 4.6° (SD 1.3°; 13% outside range of 5.0° (SD 2.0°)) using definition two. Differences between males and females were observed using definition two (males more valgus; p < 0.001). Conclusion. We developed a rapid and accurate DL tool to quantify the FMAA. Considerable variation with different measurement approaches for the FMAA supports that patient-specific anatomy and surgeon-dependent technique must be accounted for when correcting for the FMAA using an intramedullary guide. The angle between the mechanical and anatomical axes of the femur fell outside the range of 5.0° (SD 2.0°) for nearly a quarter of patients. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(2):101–108


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1216 - 1222
1 Nov 2024
Castagno S Gompels B Strangmark E Robertson-Waters E Birch M van der Schaar M McCaskie AW

Aims. Machine learning (ML), a branch of artificial intelligence that uses algorithms to learn from data and make predictions, offers a pathway towards more personalized and tailored surgical treatments. This approach is particularly relevant to prevalent joint diseases such as osteoarthritis (OA). In contrast to end-stage disease, where joint arthroplasty provides excellent results, early stages of OA currently lack effective therapies to halt or reverse progression. Accurate prediction of OA progression is crucial if timely interventions are to be developed, to enhance patient care and optimize the design of clinical trials. Methods. A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. We searched MEDLINE and Embase on 5 May 2024 for studies utilizing ML to predict OA progression. Titles and abstracts were independently screened, followed by full-text reviews for studies that met the eligibility criteria. Key information was extracted and synthesized for analysis, including types of data (such as clinical, radiological, or biochemical), definitions of OA progression, ML algorithms, validation methods, and outcome measures. Results. Out of 1,160 studies initially identified, 39 were included. Most studies (85%) were published between 2020 and 2024, with 82% using publicly available datasets, primarily the Osteoarthritis Initiative. ML methods were predominantly supervised, with significant variability in the definitions of OA progression: most studies focused on structural changes (59%), while fewer addressed pain progression or both. Deep learning was used in 44% of studies, while automated ML was used in 5%. There was a lack of standardization in evaluation metrics and limited external validation. Interpretability was explored in 54% of studies, primarily using SHapley Additive exPlanations. Conclusion. Our systematic review demonstrates the feasibility of ML models in predicting OA progression, but also uncovers critical limitations that currently restrict their clinical applicability. Future priorities should include diversifying data sources, standardizing outcome measures, enforcing rigorous validation, and integrating more sophisticated algorithms. This paradigm shift from predictive modelling to actionable clinical tools has the potential to transform patient care and disease management in orthopaedic practice. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(11):1216–1222


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 104-B, Issue 12 | Pages 1292 - 1303
1 Dec 2022
Polisetty TS Jain S Pang M Karnuta JM Vigdorchik JM Nawabi DH Wyles CC Ramkumar PN

Literature surrounding artificial intelligence (AI)-related applications for hip and knee arthroplasty has proliferated. However, meaningful advances that fundamentally transform the practice and delivery of joint arthroplasty are yet to be realized, despite the broad range of applications as we continue to search for meaningful and appropriate use of AI. AI literature in hip and knee arthroplasty between 2018 and 2021 regarding image-based analyses, value-based care, remote patient monitoring, and augmented reality was reviewed. Concerns surrounding meaningful use and appropriate methodological approaches of AI in joint arthroplasty research are summarized. Of the 233 AI-related orthopaedics articles published, 178 (76%) constituted original research, while the rest consisted of editorials or reviews. A total of 52% of original AI-related research concerns hip and knee arthroplasty (n = 92), and a narrative review is described. Three studies were externally validated. Pitfalls surrounding present-day research include conflating vernacular (“AI/machine learning”), repackaging limited registry data, prematurely releasing internally validated prediction models, appraising model architecture instead of inputted data, withholding code, and evaluating studies using antiquated regression-based guidelines. While AI has been applied to a variety of hip and knee arthroplasty applications with limited clinical impact, the future remains promising if the question is meaningful, the methodology is rigorous and transparent, the data are rich, and the model is externally validated. Simple checkpoints for meaningful AI adoption include ensuring applications focus on: administrative support over clinical evaluation and management; necessity of the advanced model; and the novelty of the question being answered.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(12):1292–1303.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1348 - 1360
1 Nov 2024
Spek RWA Smith WJ Sverdlov M Broos S Zhao Y Liao Z Verjans JW Prijs J To M Åberg H Chiri W IJpma FFA Jadav B White J Bain GI Jutte PC van den Bekerom MPJ Jaarsma RL Doornberg JN

Aims

The purpose of this study was to develop a convolutional neural network (CNN) for fracture detection, classification, and identification of greater tuberosity displacement ≥ 1 cm, neck-shaft angle (NSA) ≤ 100°, shaft translation, and articular fracture involvement, on plain radiographs.

Methods

The CNN was trained and tested on radiographs sourced from 11 hospitals in Australia and externally validated on radiographs from the Netherlands. Each radiograph was paired with corresponding CT scans to serve as the reference standard based on dual independent evaluation by trained researchers and attending orthopaedic surgeons. Presence of a fracture, classification (non- to minimally displaced; two-part, multipart, and glenohumeral dislocation), and four characteristics were determined on 2D and 3D CT scans and subsequently allocated to each series of radiographs. Fracture characteristics included greater tuberosity displacement ≥ 1 cm, NSA ≤ 100°, shaft translation (0% to < 75%, 75% to 95%, > 95%), and the extent of articular involvement (0% to < 15%, 15% to 35%, or > 35%).


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 12, Issue 7 | Pages 447 - 454
10 Jul 2023
Lisacek-Kiosoglous AB Powling AS Fontalis A Gabr A Mazomenos E Haddad FS

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly growing across many domains, of which the medical field is no exception. AI is an umbrella term defining the practical application of algorithms to generate useful output, without the need of human cognition. Owing to the expanding volume of patient information collected, known as ‘big data’, AI is showing promise as a useful tool in healthcare research and across all aspects of patient care pathways. Practical applications in orthopaedic surgery include: diagnostics, such as fracture recognition and tumour detection; predictive models of clinical and patient-reported outcome measures, such as calculating mortality rates and length of hospital stay; and real-time rehabilitation monitoring and surgical training. However, clinicians should remain cognizant of AI’s limitations, as the development of robust reporting and validation frameworks is of paramount importance to prevent avoidable errors and biases. The aim of this review article is to provide a comprehensive understanding of AI and its subfields, as well as to delineate its existing clinical applications in trauma and orthopaedic surgery. Furthermore, this narrative review expands upon the limitations of AI and future direction.

Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2023;12(7):447–454.


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 13, Issue 10 | Pages 588 - 595
17 Oct 2024
Breu R Avelar C Bertalan Z Grillari J Redl H Ljuhar R Quadlbauer S Hausner T

Aims

The aim of this study was to create artificial intelligence (AI) software with the purpose of providing a second opinion to physicians to support distal radius fracture (DRF) detection, and to compare the accuracy of fracture detection of physicians with and without software support.

Methods

The dataset consisted of 26,121 anonymized anterior-posterior (AP) and lateral standard view radiographs of the wrist, with and without DRF. The convolutional neural network (CNN) model was trained to detect the presence of a DRF by comparing the radiographs containing a fracture to the inconspicuous ones. A total of 11 physicians (six surgeons in training and five hand surgeons) assessed 200 pairs of randomly selected digital radiographs of the wrist (AP and lateral) for the presence of a DRF. The same images were first evaluated without, and then with, the support of the CNN model, and the diagnostic accuracy of the two methods was compared.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 8 | Pages 760 - 763
1 Aug 2024
Mancino F Fontalis A Haddad FS


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 12, Issue 2 | Pages 42 - 44
1 Apr 2023

The April 2023 Research Roundup360 looks at: Ear protection for orthopaedic surgeons?; Has arthroscopic meniscectomy use changed in response to the evidence?; Time to positivity of cultures obtained for periprosthetic joint infection; Bisphosphonates for post-COVID-19 osteonecrosis of the femoral head; Missing missed fractures: is AI the answer?; Congenital insensitivity to pain and correction of the knee; YouTube and paediatric elbow injuries.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 104-B, Issue 8 | Pages 929 - 937
1 Aug 2022
Gurung B Liu P Harris PDR Sagi A Field RE Sochart DH Tucker K Asopa V

Aims

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are common orthopaedic procedures requiring postoperative radiographs to confirm implant positioning and identify complications. Artificial intelligence (AI)-based image analysis has the potential to automate this postoperative surveillance. The aim of this study was to prepare a scoping review to investigate how AI is being used in the analysis of radiographs following THA and TKA, and how accurate these tools are.

Methods

The Embase, MEDLINE, and PubMed libraries were systematically searched to identify relevant articles. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews and Arksey and O’Malley framework were followed. Study quality was assessed using a modified Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies tool. AI performance was reported using either the area under the curve (AUC) or accuracy.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 4, Issue 9 | Pages 696 - 703
11 Sep 2023
Ormond MJ Clement ND Harder BG Farrow L Glester A

Aims

The principles of evidence-based medicine (EBM) are the foundation of modern medical practice. Surgeons are familiar with the commonly used statistical techniques to test hypotheses, summarize findings, and provide answers within a specified range of probability. Based on this knowledge, they are able to critically evaluate research before deciding whether or not to adopt the findings into practice. Recently, there has been an increased use of artificial intelligence (AI) to analyze information and derive findings in orthopaedic research. These techniques use a set of statistical tools that are increasingly complex and may be unfamiliar to the orthopaedic surgeon. It is unclear if this shift towards less familiar techniques is widely accepted in the orthopaedic community. This study aimed to provide an exploration of understanding and acceptance of AI use in research among orthopaedic surgeons.

Methods

Semi-structured in-depth interviews were carried out on a sample of 12 orthopaedic surgeons. Inductive thematic analysis was used to identify key themes.


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 12, Issue 5 | Pages 27 - 30
1 Oct 2023

The October 2023 Wrist & Hand Roundup360 looks at: Distal radius fracture management: surgeon factors markedly influence decision-making; Fracture-dislocation of the radiocarpal joint: bony and capsuloligamentar management, outcomes, and long-term complications; Exploring the role of artificial intelligence chatbot in the management of scaphoid fractures; Role of ultrasonography for evaluation of nerve recovery in repaired median nerve lacerations; Four weeks versus six weeks of immobilization in a cast following closed reduction for displaced distal radial fractures in adult patients: a multicentre randomized controlled trial; Rehabilitation following flexor tendon injury in Zone 2: a randomized controlled study; On the road again: return to driving following minor hand surgery; Open versus single- or dual-portal endoscopic carpal tunnel release: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 12, Issue 5 | Pages 313 - 320
8 May 2023
Saiki Y Kabata T Ojima T Kajino Y Kubo N Tsuchiya H

Aims

We aimed to assess the reliability and validity of OpenPose, a posture estimation algorithm, for measurement of knee range of motion after total knee arthroplasty (TKA), in comparison to radiography and goniometry.

Methods

In this prospective observational study, we analyzed 35 primary TKAs (24 patients) for knee osteoarthritis. We measured the knee angles in flexion and extension using OpenPose, radiography, and goniometry. We assessed the test-retest reliability of each method using intraclass correlation coefficient (1,1). We evaluated the ability to estimate other measurement values from the OpenPose value using linear regression analysis. We used intraclass correlation coefficients (2,1) and Bland–Altman analyses to evaluate the agreement and error between radiography and the other measurements.