TY - JOUR
T1 - The correlation between intra-operative 2D- and 3D fluoroscopy with postoperative CT-scans in the treatment of calcaneal fractures
AU - Beerekamp, M. S. H.
AU - de Muinck Keizer, R. J. O.
AU - Schepers, T.
AU - Beenen, L. F. M.
AU - Luitse, J. S. K.
AU - Schep, N. W.
AU - Ubbink, D. T.
AU - Goslings, J. C.
AU - on behalf of the EF3X-studygroup
PY - 2019/3/1
Y1 - 2019/3/1
N2 - Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine the correlation of the intra-operative fluoroscopic 2D- and 3D-images compared with a postoperative CT-scan, in terms of quality of reduction and fixation of calcaneal fractures. Methods: Patients requiring open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of a calcaneal fracture were recruited as part of the EF3X-trial. During surgery, intra-operative images of fluoroscopic 2D- and 3D-imaging were obtained to assess the quality of the reduction and implant position. All patients received a postoperative CT-scan within one week. The operating surgeon evaluated intra-operatively both 2D- and 3D-images according to a 23-item scoring protocol on a 3-point Likert scale. A scoring panel, consisting of three clinical experts, evaluated all images in a blinded and independent fashion. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a two-way-random model with absolute agreement. Results: A total of 102 calcaneal fractures were included. Agreement of 3D-imaging for the quality of reduction was better than 2D-imaging, although still fair, but for fixation moderate to good. Agreement between the 2D-images and the CT-scans was poor to fair. Intra-operative 2D-imaging received the highest ratings for image quality and interpretability, followed by CT-scanning. Conclusion: Implant position can be evaluated satisfactory with the aid of intra-operative 3D imaging. Although intra-operative 3D imaging had a better agreement with postoperative CT-scanning than 2D-imaging, there is a need to improve image quality and suppress scattering from implants to improve the additional value of intra-operative 3D imaging in calcaneal fracture reduction and fixation.
AB - Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine the correlation of the intra-operative fluoroscopic 2D- and 3D-images compared with a postoperative CT-scan, in terms of quality of reduction and fixation of calcaneal fractures. Methods: Patients requiring open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of a calcaneal fracture were recruited as part of the EF3X-trial. During surgery, intra-operative images of fluoroscopic 2D- and 3D-imaging were obtained to assess the quality of the reduction and implant position. All patients received a postoperative CT-scan within one week. The operating surgeon evaluated intra-operatively both 2D- and 3D-images according to a 23-item scoring protocol on a 3-point Likert scale. A scoring panel, consisting of three clinical experts, evaluated all images in a blinded and independent fashion. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a two-way-random model with absolute agreement. Results: A total of 102 calcaneal fractures were included. Agreement of 3D-imaging for the quality of reduction was better than 2D-imaging, although still fair, but for fixation moderate to good. Agreement between the 2D-images and the CT-scans was poor to fair. Intra-operative 2D-imaging received the highest ratings for image quality and interpretability, followed by CT-scanning. Conclusion: Implant position can be evaluated satisfactory with the aid of intra-operative 3D imaging. Although intra-operative 3D imaging had a better agreement with postoperative CT-scanning than 2D-imaging, there is a need to improve image quality and suppress scattering from implants to improve the additional value of intra-operative 3D imaging in calcaneal fracture reduction and fixation.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85060847752&origin=inward
UR - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30777215
U2 - 10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.01.013
DO - 10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.01.013
M3 - Article
C2 - 30777215
VL - 112
SP - 222
EP - 228
JO - European Journal of Radiology
JF - European Journal of Radiology
SN - 0720-048X
ER -