Glenoid Inclination: Choosing the Transverse Axis Is Critical-A 3D Automated versus Manually Measured Study
The aim of this study was to evaluate the variation in measured glenoid inclination measurements between each of the most used methods for measuring the scapular transverse axis with computed tomography (CT) scans, and to investigate the underlying causes that explain the differences. The glenoid ce...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of clinical medicine 2022-10, Vol.11 (20), p.6050 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | 20 |
container_start_page | 6050 |
container_title | Journal of clinical medicine |
container_volume | 11 |
creator | Gauci, Marc-Olivier Jacquot, Adrien Boux de Casson, François Deransart, Pierric Letissier, Hoël Berhouet, Julien |
description | The aim of this study was to evaluate the variation in measured glenoid inclination measurements between each of the most used methods for measuring the scapular transverse axis with computed tomography (CT) scans, and to investigate the underlying causes that explain the differences.
The glenoid center, trigonum and supraspinatus fossa were identified manually by four expert shoulder surgeons on 82 scapulae CT-scans. The transverse axis was generated either from the identified landmarks (Glenoid-Trigonum line (GT-line), Best-Fit Line Fossa (BFLF)) or by an automatic software (
-axis). An assessment of the interobserver reliability was performed. We compared the measured glenoid inclination when modifying the transverse axis to assess its impact.
Glenoid inclination remained stable between 6.3 and 8.5°. The variations occurred significantly when changing the method that determined the transverse axis with a mean biase from -1.7 (BFLF vs.
-axis) to 0.6 (BFLF vs. GT-line). The
-axis method showed higher stability to the inclination variation (
= 0.030). 9% of cases presented more than 5° of discrepancies between the methods. The manual methods presented a lower ICC (BFLF = 0.96, GT-line = 0.87) with the widest dispersion.
Methods that determine the scapular transverse axis could have a critical impact on the measurement of the glenoid inclination. Despite an overall good concordance, around 10% of cases may provide high discrepancies (≥5°) between the methods with a possible impact on surgeon clinical choice. Trigonum should be used with caution as its anatomy is highly variable and more than two single points provide a better interrater concordance. The
-axis is the most stable referential for the glenoid inclination. |
doi_str_mv | 10.3390/jcm11206050 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9604934</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2728484437</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c409t-5529bd0885117bf209bb22169cdd3cd03dcb5f45d3055484d6593105fef3fb583</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkd1LHDEUxUOxVLE-9b0EfBFk2nxMZiY-CMu2tQtKH2qfQybJuNlmEs2HuP99s2hl2_tyL9wfh3PvAeADRp8o5ejzRs0YE9Qhht6AI4L6vkF0oAd78yE4SWmDag1DS3D_DhzSjvCW9uQI_L5yxger4corZ73MNvgLuFyHkKy_g3lt4G2UPj2amAxcPNkEVwkuo81WSdcsIP0CFyWHWWaj4Y4qCd5IX6RzW3hjZCqxLn7morfvwdtJumROXvox-PXt6-3ye3P942q1XFw3qkU8N4wRPupqlmHcjxNBfBwJwR1XWlOlEdVqZFPLNEWMtUOrO8YpRmwyE51GNtBjcPmse1_G2WhlfI7SiftoZxm3Ikgr_t14uxZ34VHwDrWctlXg7EUghodiUhazTco4J70JJQnSE85IN_RdRU__QzehRF_P21FDtVf_XKnzZ0rFkFI006sZjMQuR7GXY6U_7vt_Zf-mRv8AajCYdw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2728484437</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Glenoid Inclination: Choosing the Transverse Axis Is Critical-A 3D Automated versus Manually Measured Study</title><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Gauci, Marc-Olivier ; Jacquot, Adrien ; Boux de Casson, François ; Deransart, Pierric ; Letissier, Hoël ; Berhouet, Julien</creator><creatorcontrib>Gauci, Marc-Olivier ; Jacquot, Adrien ; Boux de Casson, François ; Deransart, Pierric ; Letissier, Hoël ; Berhouet, Julien</creatorcontrib><description>The aim of this study was to evaluate the variation in measured glenoid inclination measurements between each of the most used methods for measuring the scapular transverse axis with computed tomography (CT) scans, and to investigate the underlying causes that explain the differences.
The glenoid center, trigonum and supraspinatus fossa were identified manually by four expert shoulder surgeons on 82 scapulae CT-scans. The transverse axis was generated either from the identified landmarks (Glenoid-Trigonum line (GT-line), Best-Fit Line Fossa (BFLF)) or by an automatic software (
-axis). An assessment of the interobserver reliability was performed. We compared the measured glenoid inclination when modifying the transverse axis to assess its impact.
Glenoid inclination remained stable between 6.3 and 8.5°. The variations occurred significantly when changing the method that determined the transverse axis with a mean biase from -1.7 (BFLF vs.
-axis) to 0.6 (BFLF vs. GT-line). The
-axis method showed higher stability to the inclination variation (
= 0.030). 9% of cases presented more than 5° of discrepancies between the methods. The manual methods presented a lower ICC (BFLF = 0.96, GT-line = 0.87) with the widest dispersion.
Methods that determine the scapular transverse axis could have a critical impact on the measurement of the glenoid inclination. Despite an overall good concordance, around 10% of cases may provide high discrepancies (≥5°) between the methods with a possible impact on surgeon clinical choice. Trigonum should be used with caution as its anatomy is highly variable and more than two single points provide a better interrater concordance. The
-axis is the most stable referential for the glenoid inclination.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2077-0383</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2077-0383</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/jcm11206050</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36294372</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Switzerland: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>Automation ; Clinical medicine ; Confidence intervals ; Joint surgery ; Methods ; Shoulder ; Software ; Surgeons</subject><ispartof>Journal of clinical medicine, 2022-10, Vol.11 (20), p.6050</ispartof><rights>2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2022 by the authors. 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c409t-5529bd0885117bf209bb22169cdd3cd03dcb5f45d3055484d6593105fef3fb583</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c409t-5529bd0885117bf209bb22169cdd3cd03dcb5f45d3055484d6593105fef3fb583</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-2228-7084 ; 0000-0001-6718-261X ; 0000-0001-7567-2651 ; 0000-0002-6122-9103</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9604934/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9604934/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,724,777,781,882,27905,27906,53772,53774</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36294372$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gauci, Marc-Olivier</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jacquot, Adrien</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boux de Casson, François</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deransart, Pierric</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Letissier, Hoël</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berhouet, Julien</creatorcontrib><title>Glenoid Inclination: Choosing the Transverse Axis Is Critical-A 3D Automated versus Manually Measured Study</title><title>Journal of clinical medicine</title><addtitle>J Clin Med</addtitle><description>The aim of this study was to evaluate the variation in measured glenoid inclination measurements between each of the most used methods for measuring the scapular transverse axis with computed tomography (CT) scans, and to investigate the underlying causes that explain the differences.
The glenoid center, trigonum and supraspinatus fossa were identified manually by four expert shoulder surgeons on 82 scapulae CT-scans. The transverse axis was generated either from the identified landmarks (Glenoid-Trigonum line (GT-line), Best-Fit Line Fossa (BFLF)) or by an automatic software (
-axis). An assessment of the interobserver reliability was performed. We compared the measured glenoid inclination when modifying the transverse axis to assess its impact.
Glenoid inclination remained stable between 6.3 and 8.5°. The variations occurred significantly when changing the method that determined the transverse axis with a mean biase from -1.7 (BFLF vs.
-axis) to 0.6 (BFLF vs. GT-line). The
-axis method showed higher stability to the inclination variation (
= 0.030). 9% of cases presented more than 5° of discrepancies between the methods. The manual methods presented a lower ICC (BFLF = 0.96, GT-line = 0.87) with the widest dispersion.
Methods that determine the scapular transverse axis could have a critical impact on the measurement of the glenoid inclination. Despite an overall good concordance, around 10% of cases may provide high discrepancies (≥5°) between the methods with a possible impact on surgeon clinical choice. Trigonum should be used with caution as its anatomy is highly variable and more than two single points provide a better interrater concordance. The
-axis is the most stable referential for the glenoid inclination.</description><subject>Automation</subject><subject>Clinical medicine</subject><subject>Confidence intervals</subject><subject>Joint surgery</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Shoulder</subject><subject>Software</subject><subject>Surgeons</subject><issn>2077-0383</issn><issn>2077-0383</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkd1LHDEUxUOxVLE-9b0EfBFk2nxMZiY-CMu2tQtKH2qfQybJuNlmEs2HuP99s2hl2_tyL9wfh3PvAeADRp8o5ejzRs0YE9Qhht6AI4L6vkF0oAd78yE4SWmDag1DS3D_DhzSjvCW9uQI_L5yxger4corZ73MNvgLuFyHkKy_g3lt4G2UPj2amAxcPNkEVwkuo81WSdcsIP0CFyWHWWaj4Y4qCd5IX6RzW3hjZCqxLn7morfvwdtJumROXvox-PXt6-3ye3P942q1XFw3qkU8N4wRPupqlmHcjxNBfBwJwR1XWlOlEdVqZFPLNEWMtUOrO8YpRmwyE51GNtBjcPmse1_G2WhlfI7SiftoZxm3Ikgr_t14uxZ34VHwDrWctlXg7EUghodiUhazTco4J70JJQnSE85IN_RdRU__QzehRF_P21FDtVf_XKnzZ0rFkFI006sZjMQuR7GXY6U_7vt_Zf-mRv8AajCYdw</recordid><startdate>20221013</startdate><enddate>20221013</enddate><creator>Gauci, Marc-Olivier</creator><creator>Jacquot, Adrien</creator><creator>Boux de Casson, François</creator><creator>Deransart, Pierric</creator><creator>Letissier, Hoël</creator><creator>Berhouet, Julien</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><general>MDPI</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2228-7084</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6718-261X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7567-2651</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6122-9103</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20221013</creationdate><title>Glenoid Inclination: Choosing the Transverse Axis Is Critical-A 3D Automated versus Manually Measured Study</title><author>Gauci, Marc-Olivier ; Jacquot, Adrien ; Boux de Casson, François ; Deransart, Pierric ; Letissier, Hoël ; Berhouet, Julien</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c409t-5529bd0885117bf209bb22169cdd3cd03dcb5f45d3055484d6593105fef3fb583</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Automation</topic><topic>Clinical medicine</topic><topic>Confidence intervals</topic><topic>Joint surgery</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Shoulder</topic><topic>Software</topic><topic>Surgeons</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gauci, Marc-Olivier</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jacquot, Adrien</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boux de Casson, François</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deransart, Pierric</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Letissier, Hoël</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berhouet, Julien</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of clinical medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gauci, Marc-Olivier</au><au>Jacquot, Adrien</au><au>Boux de Casson, François</au><au>Deransart, Pierric</au><au>Letissier, Hoël</au><au>Berhouet, Julien</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Glenoid Inclination: Choosing the Transverse Axis Is Critical-A 3D Automated versus Manually Measured Study</atitle><jtitle>Journal of clinical medicine</jtitle><addtitle>J Clin Med</addtitle><date>2022-10-13</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>11</volume><issue>20</issue><spage>6050</spage><pages>6050-</pages><issn>2077-0383</issn><eissn>2077-0383</eissn><abstract>The aim of this study was to evaluate the variation in measured glenoid inclination measurements between each of the most used methods for measuring the scapular transverse axis with computed tomography (CT) scans, and to investigate the underlying causes that explain the differences.
The glenoid center, trigonum and supraspinatus fossa were identified manually by four expert shoulder surgeons on 82 scapulae CT-scans. The transverse axis was generated either from the identified landmarks (Glenoid-Trigonum line (GT-line), Best-Fit Line Fossa (BFLF)) or by an automatic software (
-axis). An assessment of the interobserver reliability was performed. We compared the measured glenoid inclination when modifying the transverse axis to assess its impact.
Glenoid inclination remained stable between 6.3 and 8.5°. The variations occurred significantly when changing the method that determined the transverse axis with a mean biase from -1.7 (BFLF vs.
-axis) to 0.6 (BFLF vs. GT-line). The
-axis method showed higher stability to the inclination variation (
= 0.030). 9% of cases presented more than 5° of discrepancies between the methods. The manual methods presented a lower ICC (BFLF = 0.96, GT-line = 0.87) with the widest dispersion.
Methods that determine the scapular transverse axis could have a critical impact on the measurement of the glenoid inclination. Despite an overall good concordance, around 10% of cases may provide high discrepancies (≥5°) between the methods with a possible impact on surgeon clinical choice. Trigonum should be used with caution as its anatomy is highly variable and more than two single points provide a better interrater concordance. The
-axis is the most stable referential for the glenoid inclination.</abstract><cop>Switzerland</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><pmid>36294372</pmid><doi>10.3390/jcm11206050</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2228-7084</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6718-261X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7567-2651</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6122-9103</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2077-0383 |
ispartof | Journal of clinical medicine, 2022-10, Vol.11 (20), p.6050 |
issn | 2077-0383 2077-0383 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9604934 |
source | Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central Open Access; MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute; PubMed Central |
subjects | Automation Clinical medicine Confidence intervals Joint surgery Methods Shoulder Software Surgeons |
title | Glenoid Inclination: Choosing the Transverse Axis Is Critical-A 3D Automated versus Manually Measured Study |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-20T15%3A54%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Glenoid%20Inclination:%20Choosing%20the%20Transverse%20Axis%20Is%20Critical-A%203D%20Automated%20versus%20Manually%20Measured%20Study&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20clinical%20medicine&rft.au=Gauci,%20Marc-Olivier&rft.date=2022-10-13&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=20&rft.spage=6050&rft.pages=6050-&rft.issn=2077-0383&rft.eissn=2077-0383&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/jcm11206050&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2728484437%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2728484437&rft_id=info:pmid/36294372&rfr_iscdi=true |