Christopher T Martin, Sangwook Tim Yoon, Ram Kiran Alluri, Edward C Benzel, Chris M Bono, Samuel K Cho, Dean Chou, Xiaolong Chen, Jason P Y Cheung, Juan P Cabrera, Stipe Ćorluka, Andreas K Demetriades, Matthew F Gary, Zoher Ghogawala, Waeel Hamouda, Inbo Han, Dimitri Hauri, Patrick C Hsieh, Amit Jain, Jun S Kim, Hai V Le, Philip K Louie, Zhuojing Luo, Hans-Jörg Meisel, Sathish Muthu, Dal-Sung Ryu, Charles A Sansur, Andrew J Schoenfeld, Laura Scaramuzzo, Gregory D Schroeder, Shanmuganathan Rajasekaran, Veranis Sotiris, Gianluca Vadalà, Pieter-Paul A Vergroesen, Jeffrey C Wang, Yabin Wu, K Daniel Riew
{"title":"How Reliable is the Assessment of Fusion Status Following ACDF Using Dynamic Flexion-Extension Radiographs?","authors":"Christopher T Martin, Sangwook Tim Yoon, Ram Kiran Alluri, Edward C Benzel, Chris M Bono, Samuel K Cho, Dean Chou, Xiaolong Chen, Jason P Y Cheung, Juan P Cabrera, Stipe Ćorluka, Andreas K Demetriades, Matthew F Gary, Zoher Ghogawala, Waeel Hamouda, Inbo Han, Dimitri Hauri, Patrick C Hsieh, Amit Jain, Jun S Kim, Hai V Le, Philip K Louie, Zhuojing Luo, Hans-Jörg Meisel, Sathish Muthu, Dal-Sung Ryu, Charles A Sansur, Andrew J Schoenfeld, Laura Scaramuzzo, Gregory D Schroeder, Shanmuganathan Rajasekaran, Veranis Sotiris, Gianluca Vadalà, Pieter-Paul A Vergroesen, Jeffrey C Wang, Yabin Wu, K Daniel Riew","doi":"10.1177/21925682241303107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Reliability study.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The radiographic diagnosis of non-union is not standardized. Prior authors have suggested using a cutoff of <1 mm interspinous process motion (ISPM) on flexion-extension radiographs, but the ability of practicing surgeons to make these measurements reliably is not clear.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>29 practicing spine surgeons measured ISPM on 19 levels of ACDF from 9 patients. Surgeons relied on these measurements to report on fusion status. Inter-observer correlation co-efficients (ICC), standard error (SEM) and the minimum detectable difference (MD) of these measurements were calculated. We screened for clerical errors by checking measurements more than one standard deviation from the group mean.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The ICC for ISPM was .76 (.64; .88) with a SEM of 1 mm and a MD of 2.76 mm. Agreement on fusion status was moderate, with an ICC of .6 (.44; .76). After screening for and removing clerical errors, the ICC improved to .82 (.71; .91), SEM improved to .83 mm, and MD improved to 2.29 mm. Six reviewers had an ICC >.9. The ICC from these high performing reviewers was .94 (.9; .97), SEM was .45 mm, and MD was 1.26 mm.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The MD of 2.29 mm in our study group was not precise enough to support a cutoff of <1 mm ISPM as the sole measurement technique in screening for non-union after ACDF, and there was only moderate agreement amongst surgeons on fusion status based on dynamic radiographs. More stringent techniques are necessary to avoid mis-diagnosing non-union in clinical studies. Future studies should consider auditing measurements to identify clerical errors.</p>","PeriodicalId":12680,"journal":{"name":"Global Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":"21925682241303107"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11622210/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682241303107","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Study design: Reliability study.
Objectives: The radiographic diagnosis of non-union is not standardized. Prior authors have suggested using a cutoff of <1 mm interspinous process motion (ISPM) on flexion-extension radiographs, but the ability of practicing surgeons to make these measurements reliably is not clear.
Methods: 29 practicing spine surgeons measured ISPM on 19 levels of ACDF from 9 patients. Surgeons relied on these measurements to report on fusion status. Inter-observer correlation co-efficients (ICC), standard error (SEM) and the minimum detectable difference (MD) of these measurements were calculated. We screened for clerical errors by checking measurements more than one standard deviation from the group mean.
Results: The ICC for ISPM was .76 (.64; .88) with a SEM of 1 mm and a MD of 2.76 mm. Agreement on fusion status was moderate, with an ICC of .6 (.44; .76). After screening for and removing clerical errors, the ICC improved to .82 (.71; .91), SEM improved to .83 mm, and MD improved to 2.29 mm. Six reviewers had an ICC >.9. The ICC from these high performing reviewers was .94 (.9; .97), SEM was .45 mm, and MD was 1.26 mm.
Conclusions: The MD of 2.29 mm in our study group was not precise enough to support a cutoff of <1 mm ISPM as the sole measurement technique in screening for non-union after ACDF, and there was only moderate agreement amongst surgeons on fusion status based on dynamic radiographs. More stringent techniques are necessary to avoid mis-diagnosing non-union in clinical studies. Future studies should consider auditing measurements to identify clerical errors.
期刊介绍:
Global Spine Journal (GSJ) is the official scientific publication of AOSpine. A peer-reviewed, open access journal, devoted to the study and treatment of spinal disorders, including diagnosis, operative and non-operative treatment options, surgical techniques, and emerging research and clinical developments.GSJ is indexed in PubMedCentral, SCOPUS, and Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI).