Standard Versus Low-Dose Computed Tomography for Assessment of Acetabular Fracture Reduction

被引:4
|
作者
Gibbs, Stephen [1 ]
Carney, John [2 ]
Erdman, Mary K. [2 ]
Telis, Alexander [3 ]
Lee, Adam K. [2 ]
Fleming, Mark E. [2 ]
Lee, Jackson [2 ]
White, Eric [4 ]
Marecek, Geoffrey S. [2 ]
机构
[1] Atrium Hlth, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Charlotte, NC USA
[2] Univ Southern Calif, Keck Sch Med, Dept Orthopaed Surg, 1520 San Pablo St,Suite 2000, Los Angeles, CA 90033 USA
[3] Providence Med Grp, Spokane, WA USA
[4] Univ Southern Calif, Keck Sch Med, Dept Radiol, Los Angeles, CA 90007 USA
关键词
acetabulum; posterior wall; low-dose CT; cadaveric; INTERNAL-FIXATION; POSTOPERATIVE CT; HIP; SCAN; RISK;
D O I
10.1097/BOT.0000000000001778
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective: First, to assess the impact of varying computed tomography (CT) radiation dose on surgeon assessment of postfixation acetabular fracture reduction and malpositioned implants. Second, to quantify the accuracy of CT assessments compared with the experimentally set displacement in cadaver specimens. We hypothesized that a CT dose would not affect the assessments and that CT assessments would show a high concordance with known displacement. Methods: We created posterior wall acetabular fractures in 8 fresh-frozen cadaver hips and reduced them with varying combinations of step and gap displacement. The insertion of an intra-articular screw was randomized. Each specimen had a CT with standard (120 kV), intermediate (100 kV), and low-dose (80 kV) protocols, with and without metal artifact reduction postprocessing. Reviewers quantified gap and step displacement, overall reduction, quality of the scan, and identified intra-articular implants. Results: There were no significant differences between the CT dose protocols for assessment of gap, step, overall displacement, or the presence of intra-articular screws. Reviewers correctly categorized displacement as anatomic (0-1 mm), imperfect (2-3 mm), or poor (>3 mm) in 27.5%-57.5% of specimens. When the anatomic and imperfect categories were condensed into a single category, these scores improved to 52.5%-82.5%. Intra-articular screws were correctly identified in 56.3% of cases. Interobserver reliability was poor or moderate for all items. Reviewers rated the quality of most scans as "sufficient" (60.0%-72.5%); reviewers more frequently rated the low-dose CT as "inferior" (30.0%) and the standard dose CT as "excellent" (25%). Conclusion: A CT dose did not affect assessment of displacement, intra-articular screw penetration, or subjective rating of scan quality in the setting of a fixed posterior wall fracture.
引用
收藏
页码:462 / 468
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Standard versus low-dose computed tomography for assessment of acetabular fracture reduction using novel step and gap measurement technique
    Abrianna S. Robles
    Amit S. Piple
    Donald J. DeSanto
    Ashley Lamb
    Stephen J. Gibbs
    Nathanael D. Heckmann
    Geoffrey S. Marecek
    [J]. European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology, 2023, 33 : 3703 - 3709
  • [2] Standard versus low-dose computed tomography for assessment of acetabular fracture reduction using novel step and gap measurement technique
    Robles, Abrianna S.
    Piple, Amit S.
    DeSanto, Donald J.
    Lamb, Ashley
    Gibbs, Stephen J.
    Heckmann, Nathanael D.
    Marecek, Geoffrey S.
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND TRAUMATOLOGY, 2023, 33 (08): : 3703 - 3709
  • [3] Radiation Dose Reduction in Cervical Spine Computed Tomography in Cervical Spine Trauma: Comparison of Low-dose with Standard-dose Multidetector Computed Tomography
    Man, K. Y.
    Mo, K. M.
    Sung, H. T.
    Cho, K. Y.
    Tam, C. W.
    [J]. HONG KONG JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2019, 22 (03): : 180 - 187
  • [4] Adaptive noise reduction toward low-dose computed tomography
    Lu, HB
    Li, X
    Li, LH
    Chen, DQ
    Xing, YX
    Hsieh, J
    Liang, ZR
    [J]. MEDICAL IMAGING 2003: PHYSICS OF MEDICAL IMAGING, PTS 1 AND 2, 2003, 5030 : 759 - 766
  • [5] Computed tomography versus plain radiography assessment of acetabular fracture reduction is more predictive for native hip survivorship
    Verbeek, Diederik O.
    van der List, Jelle P.
    Helfet, David L.
    [J]. ARCHIVES OF ORTHOPAEDIC AND TRAUMA SURGERY, 2019, 139 (12) : 1667 - 1672
  • [6] Computed tomography versus plain radiography assessment of acetabular fracture reduction is more predictive for native hip survivorship
    Diederik O. Verbeek
    Jelle P. van der List
    David L. Helfet
    [J]. Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, 2019, 139 : 1667 - 1672
  • [7] Low-dose computed tomography perceptual image quality assessment
    Lee, Wonkyeong
    Wagner, Fabian
    Galdran, Adrian
    Shi, Yongyi
    Xia, Wenjun
    Wang, Ge
    Mou, Xuanqin
    Ahamed, Md. Atik
    Imran, Abdullah Al Zubaer
    Oh, Ji Eun
    Kim, Kyungsang
    Baek, Jong Tak
    Lee, Dongheon
    Hong, Boohwi
    Tempelman, Philip
    Lyu, Donghang
    Kuiper, Adrian
    van Blokland, Lars
    Calisto, Maria Baldeon
    Hsieh, Scott
    Han, Minah
    Baek, Jongduk
    Maier, Andreas
    Wang, Adam
    Gold, Garry Evan
    Choi, Jang-Hwan
    [J]. Medical Image Analysis, 2025, 99
  • [8] Computed tomography evaluation of the normal appendix: Comparison of low-dose and standard-dose unenhanced helical computed tomography
    Karabulut, Nevzat
    Boyaci, Nurefsan
    Yagci, Baki
    Herek, Duygu
    Kiroglu, Yimaz
    [J]. JOURNAL OF COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY, 2007, 31 (05) : 732 - 740
  • [9] Computed tomography–guided lung biopsy: a randomized controlled trial of low-dose versus standard-dose protocol
    Yu-Fei Fu
    Guang-Chao Li
    Qing-Song Xu
    Yi-Bing Shi
    Chen Wang
    Tao Wang
    [J]. European Radiology, 2020, 30 : 1584 - 1592
  • [10] Low-dose spiral computed tomography of the thorax - Comparison with the standard-dose technique
    Takahashi, M
    Maguire, WM
    Ashtari, M
    Khan, A
    Papp, Z
    Alberico, R
    Campbell, W
    Eacobacci, T
    Herman, PG
    [J]. INVESTIGATIVE RADIOLOGY, 1998, 33 (02) : 68 - 73