膝关节短片上的股胫骨角不能准确预测下肢机械排列。关于不同股胫夹角定义和膝关节短片类型的系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 1.4 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS Orthopedic Reviews Pub Date : 2024-06-27 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.52965/001c.120053
Giancarlo Giurazza, Giovanni Perricone, Edoardo Franceschetti, Stefano Campi, Pietro Gregori, Biagio Zampogna, Umberto Gabriele Cardile, Giuseppe Francesco Papalia, Rocco Papalia
{"title":"膝关节短片上的股胫骨角不能准确预测下肢机械排列。关于不同股胫夹角定义和膝关节短片类型的系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Giancarlo Giurazza, Giovanni Perricone, Edoardo Franceschetti, Stefano Campi, Pietro Gregori, Biagio Zampogna, Umberto Gabriele Cardile, Giuseppe Francesco Papalia, Rocco Papalia","doi":"10.52965/001c.120053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA) on Full Limb Radiographs (FLRs) is the gold standard for coronal knee alignment assessment. Despite the widespread utilization of the more convenient femorotibial angle (FTA) on either antero-posterior (AP) or postero-anterior (PA) short knee radiographs (SKRs), its definition and correlation with HKA remains controversial. This review is the first to systematically investigate FTA-HKA correlation and the effect of different FTA methods and SKRs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Systematic literature search (Pubmed, Scopus, Cochrane Library) followed PRISMA guidelines, to evaluate studies examining the FTA-HKA correlation. Meta-analyses compared the 3 most common FTA methods, knee center determination method and SKR types.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>17 studies (2597 patients, 3234 knees) were included. The strongest correlation with HKA (r = 0.78) was found for FTA Method 1 (angle formed by lines drawn from the midpoint of tibial spines to points 10 cm above and below the joint line). No significant differences were observed when grouping the FTA methods by knee center assessment (Group I, r = 0.78; Group II, r = 0.77). AP SKRs showed a trend towards stronger FTA-HKA correlation compared to PA SKRs, in both Method 1 (r = 0.79 vs 0.75) and Method 3 (r = 0.80 vs 0.66).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Irrespective of its definition or type of SKR used, FTA lacks reliable accuracy in predicting the HKA in most knees. FLRs should be used whenever precise estimation of the patient's alignment is necessary. Caution is warranted in interpreting studies investigating knee alignment or knee arthroplasty outcomes based on FTA.</p>","PeriodicalId":19669,"journal":{"name":"Orthopedic Reviews","volume":"16 ","pages":"120053"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11213696/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Femorotibial angle on short knee radiographs fails to accurately predict the lower limb mechanical alignment. A systematic review and meta-analysis on different femorotibial angle definitions and short knee radiograph types.\",\"authors\":\"Giancarlo Giurazza, Giovanni Perricone, Edoardo Franceschetti, Stefano Campi, Pietro Gregori, Biagio Zampogna, Umberto Gabriele Cardile, Giuseppe Francesco Papalia, Rocco Papalia\",\"doi\":\"10.52965/001c.120053\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA) on Full Limb Radiographs (FLRs) is the gold standard for coronal knee alignment assessment. Despite the widespread utilization of the more convenient femorotibial angle (FTA) on either antero-posterior (AP) or postero-anterior (PA) short knee radiographs (SKRs), its definition and correlation with HKA remains controversial. This review is the first to systematically investigate FTA-HKA correlation and the effect of different FTA methods and SKRs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Systematic literature search (Pubmed, Scopus, Cochrane Library) followed PRISMA guidelines, to evaluate studies examining the FTA-HKA correlation. Meta-analyses compared the 3 most common FTA methods, knee center determination method and SKR types.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>17 studies (2597 patients, 3234 knees) were included. The strongest correlation with HKA (r = 0.78) was found for FTA Method 1 (angle formed by lines drawn from the midpoint of tibial spines to points 10 cm above and below the joint line). No significant differences were observed when grouping the FTA methods by knee center assessment (Group I, r = 0.78; Group II, r = 0.77). AP SKRs showed a trend towards stronger FTA-HKA correlation compared to PA SKRs, in both Method 1 (r = 0.79 vs 0.75) and Method 3 (r = 0.80 vs 0.66).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Irrespective of its definition or type of SKR used, FTA lacks reliable accuracy in predicting the HKA in most knees. FLRs should be used whenever precise estimation of the patient's alignment is necessary. Caution is warranted in interpreting studies investigating knee alignment or knee arthroplasty outcomes based on FTA.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19669,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Orthopedic Reviews\",\"volume\":\"16 \",\"pages\":\"120053\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11213696/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Orthopedic Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.52965/001c.120053\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopedic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52965/001c.120053","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:全肢体X光片(FLR)上的髋膝踝关节角(HKA)是膝关节冠状位对齐评估的黄金标准。尽管在膝关节前-后(AP)或后-前(PA)短位X光片(SKR)上更方便的股胫骨角(FTA)已被广泛使用,但其定义及其与HKA的相关性仍存在争议。本综述首次系统研究了 FTA 与 HKA 的相关性以及不同 FTA 方法和 SKR 的影响:方法:系统性文献检索(Pubmed、Scopus、Cochrane Library)遵循 PRISMA 指南,以评估检查 FTA-HKA 相关性的研究。Meta 分析比较了 3 种最常见的 FTA 方法、膝关节中心确定方法和 SKR 类型:结果:共纳入 17 项研究(2597 名患者,3234 个膝关节)。FTA方法1(从胫骨棘中点到关节线上下10厘米处的连线所形成的角度)与HKA的相关性最强(r = 0.78)。按膝关节中心评估对 FTA 方法进行分组时未发现明显差异(第一组,r = 0.78;第二组,r = 0.77)。在方法 1(r = 0.79 vs 0.75)和方法 3(r = 0.80 vs 0.66)中,与 PA SKR 相比,AP SKR 显示出更强的 FTA-HKA 相关性趋势:结论:无论 SKR 的定义或类型如何,FTA 在预测大多数膝关节的 HKA 方面都缺乏可靠的准确性。如果需要精确估计患者的对线,则应使用FLR。在解释基于FTA的膝关节对位或膝关节置换术结果的研究时应谨慎。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Femorotibial angle on short knee radiographs fails to accurately predict the lower limb mechanical alignment. A systematic review and meta-analysis on different femorotibial angle definitions and short knee radiograph types.

Introduction: Hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA) on Full Limb Radiographs (FLRs) is the gold standard for coronal knee alignment assessment. Despite the widespread utilization of the more convenient femorotibial angle (FTA) on either antero-posterior (AP) or postero-anterior (PA) short knee radiographs (SKRs), its definition and correlation with HKA remains controversial. This review is the first to systematically investigate FTA-HKA correlation and the effect of different FTA methods and SKRs.

Methods: Systematic literature search (Pubmed, Scopus, Cochrane Library) followed PRISMA guidelines, to evaluate studies examining the FTA-HKA correlation. Meta-analyses compared the 3 most common FTA methods, knee center determination method and SKR types.

Results: 17 studies (2597 patients, 3234 knees) were included. The strongest correlation with HKA (r = 0.78) was found for FTA Method 1 (angle formed by lines drawn from the midpoint of tibial spines to points 10 cm above and below the joint line). No significant differences were observed when grouping the FTA methods by knee center assessment (Group I, r = 0.78; Group II, r = 0.77). AP SKRs showed a trend towards stronger FTA-HKA correlation compared to PA SKRs, in both Method 1 (r = 0.79 vs 0.75) and Method 3 (r = 0.80 vs 0.66).

Conclusion: Irrespective of its definition or type of SKR used, FTA lacks reliable accuracy in predicting the HKA in most knees. FLRs should be used whenever precise estimation of the patient's alignment is necessary. Caution is warranted in interpreting studies investigating knee alignment or knee arthroplasty outcomes based on FTA.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Orthopedic Reviews
Orthopedic Reviews ORTHOPEDICS-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
122
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: Orthopedic Reviews is an Open Access, online-only, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles concerned with any aspect of orthopedics, as well as diagnosis and treatment, trauma, surgical procedures, arthroscopy, sports medicine, rehabilitation, pediatric and geriatric orthopedics. All bone-related molecular and cell biology, genetics, pathophysiology and epidemiology papers are also welcome. The journal publishes original articles, brief reports, reviews and case reports of general interest.
期刊最新文献
Haemodynamics, side effects and safety of the combination of continuous femoral nerve block and intravenous parecoxib for pain management after Total Knee Arthroplasty: A pilot study. Practice Patterns of Physicians who Perform Caudal Epidural Steroid Injections. Lateral ligament reconstruction and additive medial ligament reconstruction in chronic ankle instability: a retrospective study. Anesthetic Management of a Patient with Renal Cell Carcinoma-Associated Venous Thrombosis and Massive Transfusion. Comparative assessment of bone cement implantation syndrome in cemented bipolar hemiarthroplasty: impact in patients with and without preexisting heart disease.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1