Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Reliability of the assessment of lower limb torsion using computed tomography: analysis of five different techniques

  • Scientific Article
  • Published:
Skeletal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

Various methods have been described to define the femoral neck and distal tibial axes based on a single CT image. The most popular are the Hernandez and Weiner methods for defining the femoral neck axis and the Jend, Ulm, and bimalleolar methods for defining the distal tibial axis. The purpose of this study was to calculate the intra- and interobserver reliability of the above methods and to determine intermethod differences.

Methods

Three physicians separately measured the rotational profile of 44 patients using CT examinations on two different occasions. The average age of patients was 36.3 ± 14.4 years, and there were 25 male and 19 female patients. After completing the first two sessions of measurements, one observer chose certain cuts at the levels of the femoral neck, femoral condylar area, tibial plateau, and distal tibia. The three physicians then repeated all measurements using these CT cuts.

Results

The greatest interclass correlation coefficients were achieved with the Hernandez (0.99 intra- and 0.93 interobserver correlations) and bimalleolar methods (0.99 intra- and 0.92 interobserver correlations) for measuring the femoral neck and distal tibia axes, respectively. A statistically significant decrease in the interobserver median absolute differences could be achieved through the use of predefined CT scans only for measurements of the femoral condylar axis and the distal tibial axis using the Ulm method. The bimalleolar axis method underestimated the tibial torsion angle by an average of 4.8° and 13° compared to the Ulm and Jend techniques, respectively.

Conclusions

The methods with the greatest inter- and intraobserver reliabilities were the Hernandez and bimalleolar methods for measuring femoral anteversion and tibial torsion, respectively. The high intermethod differences make it difficult to compare measurements made with different methods.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Paley D, Herzenberg JE, Tetsworth K, McKie J, Bhave A. Deformity planning for frontal and sagittal plane corrective osteotomies. Orthop Clin North Am. 1994;25:425–65.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Paley D, Tetsworth K. Mechanical axis deviation of the lower limbs. Preoperative planning of multiapical frontal plane angular and bowing deformities of the femur and tibia. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1992:65–71.

  3. Paley D, Tetsworth K. Mechanical axis deviation of the lower limbs. Preoperative planning of uniapical angular deformities of the tibia or femur. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1992:48–64.

  4. Feldman DS, Henderson ER, Levine HB, et al. Interobserver and intraobserver reliability in lower-limb deformity correction measurements. J Pediatr Orthop. 2007;27:204–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Noyes FR, Goebel SX, West J. Opening wedge tibial osteotomy: the 3-triangle method to correct axial alignment and tibial slope. Am J Sports Med. 2005;33:378–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Jaarsma RL, Bruggeman AW, Pakvis DF, et al. Computed tomography determined femoral torsion is not accurate. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2004;124:552–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Murphy SB, Simon SR, Kijewski PK, Wilkinson RH, Griscom NT. Femoral anteversion. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1987;69:1169–76.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Sugano N, Noble PC, Kamaric E. A comparison of alternative methods of measuring femoral anteversion. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1998;22:610–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Kuo TY, Skedros JG, Bloebaum RD. Measurement of femoral anteversion by biplane radiography and computed tomography imaging: comparison with an anatomic reference. Invest Radiol. 2003;38:221–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bouchard R, Meeder PJ, Krug F, Libicher M. Evaluation of tibial torsion—comparison of clinical methods and computed tomography. Rofo. 2004;176:1278–84.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Hernandez RJ, Tachdjian MO, Poznanski AK, Dias LS. CT determination of femoral torsion. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1981;137:97–101.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Weiner DS, Cook AJ, Hoyt Jr WA, Oravec CE. Computed tomography in the measurement of femoral anteversion. Orthopedics. 1978;1:299–306.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Jend HH, Heller M, Dallek M, Schoettle H. Measurement of tibial torsion by computer tomography. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh). 1981;22:271–6.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Jend HH, Heller M, Schontag H, Schoettle H. A computer tomographic method for the determination of tibial torsion (author’s transl). Rofo. 1980;133:22–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Reikeras O, Hoiseth A. Torsion of the leg determined by computed tomography. Acta Orthop Scand. 1989;60:330–3.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Yagi T, Sasaki T. Tibial torsion in patients with medial-type osteoarthritic knee. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1986:177–182.

  17. Goutallier D, Van Driessche S, Manicom O, et al. Influence of lower-limb torsion on long-term outcomes of tibial valgus osteotomy for medial compartment knee osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88:2439–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Waidelich HA, Strecker W, Schneider E. Computed tomographic torsion-angle and length measurement of the lower extremity. The methods, normal values and radiation load. Rofo. 1992;157:245–51.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Fleiss J. The design and analysis of clinical experiments. New York: John Wiley; 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Strecker W, Keppler P, Gebhard F, Kinzl L. Length and torsion of the lower limb. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1997;79:1019–23.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Jaarsma RL, Pakvis DF, Verdonschot N, Biert J, van Kampen A. Rotational malalignment after intramedullary nailing of femoral fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 2004;18:403–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Puloski S, Romano C, Buckley R, Powell J. Rotational malalignment of the tibia following reamed intramedullary nail fixation. J Orthop Trauma. 2004;18:397–402.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Jaarsma RL, Ongkiehong BF, Gruneberg C, et al. Compensation for rotational malalignment after intramedullary nailing for femoral shaft fractures. An analysis by plantar pressure measurements during gait. Injury. 2004;35:1270–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Tornetta 3rd P, Ritz G, Kantor A. Femoral torsion after interlocked nailing of unstable femoral fractures. J Trauma. 1995;38:213–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest statement

The authors certify that they have no commercial associations (e.g., consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, etc.) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Trauma Department, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany

    Emmanouil Liodakis, Iosifina Doxastaki, Kongfai Chu, Christian Krettek, Ralph Gaulke & Musa Citak

  2. Orthopaedic Surgery Department, Sohag University Hospital, 82524, Sohag, Egypt

    Mohamed Kenawey

Authors
  1. Emmanouil Liodakis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Iosifina Doxastaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kongfai Chu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Christian Krettek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ralph Gaulke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Musa Citak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Mohamed Kenawey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Emmanouil Liodakis.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Liodakis, E., Doxastaki, I., Chu, K. et al. Reliability of the assessment of lower limb torsion using computed tomography: analysis of five different techniques. Skeletal Radiol 41, 305–311 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-011-1185-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-011-1185-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation