16-Slice Spiral Computer Tomography and Digital Radiography: Diagnosis of Ankle and Foot Fractures

  • Hanqing Zhang
  • Liangzhou Xu
  • Peng Wang
  • Huang Bo
  • Jian Liu
  • Xiaojun Dong
  • Nianzu Ye
  • Wang Fei
  • Peng Gu
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 269)

Abstract

Acute ankle and foot fracture is one of the most common injuries seen in trauma departments. It is not easy to diagnose subtle occult fracture or fracture displacement using Digital Radiography (DR) because of the complex anatomical structure of the ankle and foot, and overlapping structure of DR. Computed Tomography (CT) technologies provides 3-dimensional (3D) visualization of the anatomical structure and eliminates overlapping structures, makes it easier for diagnosis purposes. Seventy-three ankle and foot injuries patients were examined using both DR and CT. The results showed that the diagnosis of fracture using DR was 68.5 % and 100 % using CT. The study showed that CT has better diagnosis rate than DR (P < 0.01). The 3D reconstruction of the CT images provides a better tool showing the position and type of fracture lines and free sheet position clearly for diagnosis purposes. Therefore 16-slice spiral CT has a clear advantage over DR in the diagnosis, especially on the subtle occult fracture and fracture displacement, treatment and evaluation purposes in clinical intervention.

Keywords

16-slice spiral CT Digital radiography Ankle and foot fractures Diagnosis 

References

  1. 1.
    Bo S, Ying D (2011) Descriptive anatomy [M]. Beijing. People’s Medical Publishing House, Chinese, pp 56–58Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Choplin RH, Buckwalter KA, Rydberg J et al (2004) CT with 3D rendering of the tendons of the foot and ankle: technique, normal anatomy, and disease [J]. Radiographics 24(2): 343–356Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Frahm R, Wimmer B, Bonnaire F (1991) Computed tomography of the superior and inferior ankle joint [J]. Radiologe 31(12):609–615Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Haapamaki VV, Kiuru MJ, Koskinen SK (2004) Ankle and foot injuries: analysis of MDCT findings [J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183(3):615–622Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kiuru MJ, Pihlajamaki HK, Hietanen HJ et al (2002) MR imaging, bone scintigraphy, and radiography in bone stress injuries of the pelvis and the lower extremity [J]. Acta Radiol 43(2):207–212Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Magid D, Michelson JD, Ney DR et al (1990) Adult ankle fractures: comparison of plain films and interactive two- and three-dimensional CT scans [J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol 154(5):1017–1023Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shi L, Tian J, Wang P et al (2003) Evaluation of multi-slice spiral CT in diagnosing trauma of bones and joints: a comparison between different reconstructions [J]. J Clin Radiol 22:772–774Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hanqing Zhang
    • 1
  • Liangzhou Xu
    • 2
  • Peng Wang
    • 2
  • Huang Bo
    • 2
  • Jian Liu
    • 2
  • Xiaojun Dong
    • 1
  • Nianzu Ye
    • 3
  • Wang Fei
    • 4
  • Peng Gu
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of OrthopaedicsWuhan Hospital of Traditional Chinese MedicineWuhanChina
  2. 2.Department of RadiologyWuhan Hospital of Traditional Chinese MedicineWuhanChina
  3. 3.Department of Radiology2nd hospital of WuhanWuhanChina
  4. 4.Class of Seven-Year Orthopaedics Program of Hubei University of Chinese MedicineWuhanChina

Personalised recommendations