An Evaluation of the Reliability of Manual Landmark Identification on 3D Segmented Wrists

BACKGROUND

Three-dimensional (3D) preoperative planning is increasingly used in orthopaedic surgery. Two-dimensional (2D) characterization of distal radial deformities remains inaccurate, and 3D planning requires a reliable reference frame at the wrist. We aim to evaluate the reliability of the determination of anatomical points placed manually on 3D models of the radius to determine which of those points allow reliable morphometric measurements.

METHODS

Twenty-three radial scans were reconstructed in 3D. Five operators specialized in the upper limb manually positioned 8 anatomical points on each model. One of the operators repeated the operation 6 times. The anatomical points were based on previously published 3D models used for radial inclination and dorsopalmar tilt measurements. The repeatability and reproducibility of the measurements derived using this manual landmarking were calculated using different measurement methods based on the identified points. An error of ≤2° was considered clinically acceptable.

RESULTS

This study of intraobserver and interobserver variability of the anatomic points allowed us to determine the least variable and most accurately defined points. The middle of the ulnar border of the radius, the radial styloid, and the midpoint of the ulnar incisura of the radius were the least variable. The palmar and dorsal ends of the ridge delineating the scaphoid and lunate facets were the most variable. Only 1 of the radial inclination measurement methods was clinically acceptable; the others had a repeatability and reproducibility limit of >2°, making those measurements clinically unacceptable.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of isolated points seems insufficient for the development of a wrist reference frame, especially for the purpose of measuring dorsopalmar tilt. If one concurs that an error of 2° is unacceptable for all distal radial measurements, then clinicians should avoid using 3D landmarked points, due to their unreliability, except for radial inclination measured using the radial styloid and the midpoint of the ulnar edge of the radius. A characterization of the wrist using 3D shapes that fit the articular surface of the radius should be considered.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnostic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Three-Dimensional Versus Radiographic Measurements for Analyzing Extra-Articular Distal Radius Malunion

PURPOSE

To compare the accuracy of evaluating deformity in distal radius malunions using plain radiographic measurements compared with a 3-dimensional method involving 3-dimensional computer bone models.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who had an extra-articular distal radius malunion were included. Standard radiographs and computed tomography scans of both wrists were performed. Palmar tilt, radial tilt, and ulnar variance were measured on radiographs. The computed tomography scan data were sent to a workstation and 3-dimensional bone surface models of the radius were created. The 3-dimensional palmar tilt, 3-dimensional radial tilt, 3-dimensional ulnar variance, and axial rotational deformity were calculated.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients, mean age 40 years (range, 22-57 years) were included. The 3 3-dimensional values were positively correlated with their corresponding radiographic values. Nevertheless, the 3-dimesional palmar tilt and 3-dimensional radial tilt values were slightly smaller than the radiographic palmar tilt and radial tilt. The quantitative difference between the 3-dimensional method and plain radiographs was on average 2° for the dorsal deformity group and 3° for the palmar deformity group. The 3-dimensional ulnar variance was significantly higher than the radiographic ulnar variance by an average of +1.3 mm for malunions with dorsal tilt and +0.6 mm for malunions with palmar tilt. The 3-dimensional method allowed us to measure the extent of the axial rotational deformity, which was 9° on average (range, 2° to 21°).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite small differences, measurements made on both plain radiographs and 3-dimensional computer bone models are accurate for evaluating the deformity in extra-articular distal radius malunions. Our 3-dimensional method seems to provide a more accurate measurement of ulnar variance, particularly for dorsally angulated cases, and is helpful for measuring rotational malalignment.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

In this study, we found that either a 3-dimensional computer bone model or plain radiographs can be used as a benchmark to evaluate the deformity of extra-articular distal radius malunion. The 3-dimensional method can also be used to define axial rotational deformity.

Computer-assisted 3D preoperative planning of corrective osteotomy for extra-articular distal radius malunion: A 16-patient case series

The aim of this prospective study was to describe the surgical procedure and to report outcomes of computer-assisted 3D preoperative planning of corrective osteotomy for extra-articular distal radius malunions. Sixteen consecutive patients were enrolled. CT scans of both wrists were performed, and 3D bone surface models of the radii were created. Software was used to simulate the osteotomy and the reorientation of the distal radial articular surface. Patient-specific cutting and drilling guides for intraoperative guidance of the osteotomy as well as bone graft templates were also simulated. At a mean follow-up of 12 months (range 6-27) after surgery, pain was reduced from 3 to 0.3 at rest and 6.8 to 1.5 during effort according to a visual analog scale. The average wrist flexion-extension was 145° and pronation-supination was 155°. Grip strength was 91% of the contralateral side. All patients achieved primary bone union in a mean of 10 weeks (range, 7-18). Using our 3D analysis method, preoperative 3D values showed no significant difference with radiographic measurement. Moreover, there was no significant difference between the postoperative radiographic values in term of correction. This procedure provides satisfactory clinical and radiological results with minimal residual malalignment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.