0
Scientific Article   |    
Femoral Anteversion in Children with Cerebral Palsy Assessment with Two and Three-Dimensional Computed Tomography Scans
Jon R. Davids, MD; Amanda D. Marshall, MD; Edward R. Blocker, MD; Steven L. Frick, MD; Dawn W. Blackhurst, MS; Edward Skewes, CPO
The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery.  2003; 85:481-488 
5 Recommendations (Recommend) | 3 Comments | Saved by 3 Users Save Case

Abstract

Background: Assessment of femoral anteversion in children with cerebral palsy with two or three-dimensional computed tomography scans may be limited by both positional and anatomic variables. Three-dimensional computed tomography techniques are considered to be more accurate than two-dimensional imaging when the femur is not optimally positioned in the gantry or when the neck-shaft angle is increased.

Methods: Computed tomography scanning was performed on a series of nine model femora with anteversion ranging from 20° to 60° and neck-shaft angles ranging from 120° to 160°. Each femoral model was scanned in two holding devices, the first of which held the femur in optimal alignment (normal model) and the second of which held the femur in flexion, adduction, and internal rotation (cerebral palsy model) relative to the gantry. Femoral anteversion was calculated for each model from two and three-dimensional computed tomography scans by four examiners on two separate occasions. The intraobserver and interobserver reliability, the accuracy, and the effect of increasing the neck-shaft angle on the accuracy of the measurements made on the two and three-dimensional scans of the normal and cerebral palsy models were then examined.

Results: The mean differences in the measurements of femoral anteversion made by the same examiner (intraobserver reliability) were <2° for the two-dimensional scans of the normal and cerebral palsy models and the three-dimensional scans of the normal models, and the mean difference was <4° for the three-dimensional scans of the cerebral palsy models. The mean differences among examiners (interobserver reliability) were <3° for the two-dimensional scans of the normal and cerebral palsy models and the three-dimensional scans of the normal models, and the mean difference was <6° for the three-dimensional scans of the cerebral palsy models. The accuracy of the assessments of femoral anteversion of the normally aligned models was comparable between the two and three-dimensional scans. However, the three-dimensional assessment was significantly more accurate than the two-dimensional assessment for measurement of anteversion of the cerebral palsy models (p = 0.003). Accuracy within 5° was comparable between the two and three-dimensional scans for measurement of the normally aligned models, with 86% of the two-dimensional measurements and 78% of the three-dimensional measurements falling within 5° of the actual measurements. However, the accuracy within 5° was significantly compromised when the models were placed in cerebral palsy alignment. Only 3% of the two-dimensional measurements and 14% of the three-dimensional measurements fell within 5° of the actual measurements, with three-dimensional assessment being significantly better than two-dimensional assessment (p = 0.006). Increasing the neck-shaft angle did not significantly compromise the accuracy of measurement of femoral anteversion with either the two-dimensional or the three-dimensional technique (p > 0.05 for all comparisons).

Conclusions: When adequate alignment of the femur in the computed tomography scanner was possible, a simple two-dimensional technique exhibited excellent intraobserver and interobserver reliability and clinically acceptable accuracy within the relevant ranges of anatomic variability tested (neck-shaft angles of 120° to 160° and femoral anteversion of 20° to 60°). When optimal alignment of the femur in the scanner was not possible, neither two-dimensional nor three-dimensional techniques exhibited clinically acceptable accuracy for the measurement of femoral anteversion.

Figures in this Article
    Sign In to Your Personal ProfileSign In To Access Full Content
    Not a Subscriber?
    Get online access for 30 days for $30
    New to JBJS?
    Sign up for a full subscription to both the print and online editions
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities, to comment on public articles, or to sign up for alerts.
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities
    Have a subscription to the print edition?
    Current subscribers to The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery in either the print or quarterly DVD formats receive free online access to JBJS.org.
    Forgot your password?
    Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a reminder to the email address on record.

     
    Forgot your username or need assistance? Please contact customer service at subs@jbjs.org. If your access is provided
    by your institution, please contact you librarian or administrator for username and password information. Institutional
    administrators, to reset your institution's master username or password, please contact subs@jbjs.org
    Accreditation Statement
    These activities have been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) through the joint sponsorship of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
    CME Activities Associated with This Article
    Submit a Comment
    Please read the other comments before you post yours. Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest.
    Comments are moderated and will appear on the site at the discretion of JBJS editorial staff.

    * = Required Field
    (if multiple authors, separate names by comma)
    Example: John Doe




    Related Articles
    Related Cases
    Related Content
    Topic Collections
    Related Audio and Videos
    PubMed Articles
    Clinical Trials
    Readers of This Also Read...
    jbjs jobs
    12/22/2011
    ME - Central Maine Medical Center
    12/22/2011
    VA - Charleston Area Medical Center
    12/22/2011
    Maine - Central Maine Medical Center