» Articles » PMID: 36707864

Intra- and Interobserver Reliability Analysis of Pediatric Lower Limb Parameters on Digital Long Leg Radiographs

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialty Orthopedics
Date 2023 Jan 28
PMID 36707864
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Malalignments of the lower extremity are common reasons for orthopedic consultation because it may lead to osteoarthritis in adulthood. An accurate and reliable radiological assessment of lower limb alignment in children and adolescents is essential for clinical decision-making on treatment of limb deformities and for regular control after a surgical intervention.

Objective: First, does the analysis of full-length standing anteroposterior radiographs show a good intra- and interobserver reliability? Second, which parameter is most susceptible to observer-dependent errors? Third, what is the Standard Error of Measurement (SEM) of the absolute femoral and tibial length?

Methods: Two observers evaluated digital radiographs of 144 legs from 36 children and adolescents with pathological valgus alignment before a temporary hemiepiphysiodesis and before implant removal. Parameters included Mechanical Femorotibial Angle (MFA), Mechanical Axis Deviation (MAD), mechanical Lateral Distal Femoral Angle (mLDFA), mechanical Medial Proximal Tibial Angle (mMPTA), mechanical Lateral Proximal Femoral Angle (mLPFA), mechanical Lateral Distal Tibial Angle (mLDTA), Joint Line Convergence Angle (JLCA), femur length, tibial length. Intra- and interobserver reliability (ICC), SEM and proportional errors were calculated.

Results: The intra- and interobserver reliability for almost all measurements was found to be good to excellent (Intra-ICC: 0.849-0.999; Inter-ICC: 0.864-0.996). The SEM of both observers was found to be ± 1.39° (MFA), ± 3.31 mm (MAD), ± 1.06° (mLDFA) and ± 1.29° (mMPTA). The proportional error of MAD and MFA is comparable (47.29% vs. 46.33%). The relevant knee joint surface angles show a lower proportional error for mLDFA (42.40%) than for mMPTA (51.60%). JLCA has a proportional error of 138%. Furthermore, the SEM for the absolute values of the femoral and tibial length was 4.53 mm for the femur and 3.12 mm for the tibia.

Conclusions: In conclusion, a precise malalignment measurement and the knowledge about SEM of the respective parameters are crucial for correct surgical or nonsurgical treatment. The susceptibility to error must be considered when interpreting malalignment analysis and must be considered when planning a surgical intervention. The results of the present study elucidate that MAD and MFA are equally susceptible to observer-dependent errors. This study shows good to excellent intra- and interobserver ICCs for all leg alignment parameters and joint surface angles, except for JLCA.

Trial Registration: This study was registered with DRKS (German Clinical Trials Register) under the number DRKS00015053.

Level Of Evidence: I, Diagnostic Study.

Citing Articles

Automated Measurements of Long Leg Radiographs in Pediatric Patients: A Pilot Study to Evaluate an Artificial Intelligence-Based Algorithm.

van der Lelij T, Grootjans W, Braamhaar K, de Witte P Children (Basel). 2024; 11(10).

PMID: 39457148 PMC: 11505924. DOI: 10.3390/children11101182.


Relevance of instrumented gait analysis in the prediction of the rebound phenomenon after guided growth intervention.

Stief F, Holder J, Braun S, Brenneis M, van Drongelen S, Byrnes S Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):16060.

PMID: 38992006 PMC: 11239906. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-66169-9.


Artificial intelligence-based analyses of varus leg alignment and after high tibial osteotomy show high accuracy and reproducibility.

Stotter C, Klestil T, Chen K, Hummer A, Salzlechner C, Angele P Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2023; 31(12):5885-5895.

PMID: 37975938 PMC: 10719140. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-023-07644-0.

References
1.
Gupta P, Gupta V, Patil B, Verma V . Angular deformities of lower limb in children: Correction for whom, when and how?. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2020; 11(2):196-201. PMC: 7026560. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcot.2020.01.008. View

2.
Saran N, Rathjen K . Guided growth for the correction of pediatric lower limb angular deformity. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2010; 18(9):528-36. DOI: 10.5435/00124635-201009000-00004. View

3.
Feldman D, Henderson E, Levine H, Schrank P, Koval K, Patel R . Interobserver and intraobserver reliability in lower-limb deformity correction measurements. J Pediatr Orthop. 2007; 27(2):204-8. DOI: 10.1097/01.bpb.0000242441.96434.6f. View

4.
Holder J, Feja Z, van Drongelen S, Adolf S, Bohm H, Meurer A . Effect of guided growth intervention on static leg alignment and dynamic knee contact forces during gait. Gait Posture. 2020; 78:80-88. DOI: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2020.03.012. View

5.
Radtke K, Goede F, Schweidtmann K, Schwamberger T, Calliess T, Fregien B . Temporary hemiepiphysiodesis for correcting idiopathic and pathologic deformities of the knee: A retrospective analysis of 355 cases. Knee. 2020; 27(3):723-730. DOI: 10.1016/j.knee.2020.04.024. View