An Evaluation of the Reliability of Manual Landmark Identification on 3D Segmented Wrists

• Published in: Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume Vol. 106; no. 4; p. 315
• Main Authors: Winter, Rémy, Citarel, Arnaud, Chabrand, Patrick, Chenel, Audrey, Bronsard, Nicolas, Poujade, Thibault, Gauci, Marc-Olivier
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 21.02.2024
• Subjects: Humans; Lunate Bone; Radius - diagnostic imaging; Radius Fractures - surgery; Reproducibility of Results; Wrist; Wrist Joint - diagnostic imaging
• ISSN: 1535-1386
• DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.23.00173

Three-dimensional (3D) preoperative planning is increasingly used in orthopaedic surgery. Two-dimensional (2D) characterization of distal radial deformities remains inaccurate, and 3D planning requires a reliable reference frame at the wrist. We aim to evaluate the reliability of the determination of anatomical points placed manually on 3D models of the radius to determine which of those points allow reliable morphometric measurements. Twenty-three radial scans were reconstructed in 3D. Five operators specialized in the upper limb manually positioned 8 anatomical points on each model. One of the operators repeated the operation 6 times. The anatomical points were based on previously published 3D models used for radial inclination and dorsopalmar tilt measurements. The repeatability and reproducibility of the measurements derived using this manual landmarking were calculated using different measurement methods based on the identified points. An error of ≤2° was considered clinically acceptable. This study of intraobserver and interobserver variability of the anatomic points allowed us to determine the least variable and most accurately defined points. The middle of the ulnar border of the radius, the radial styloid, and the midpoint of the ulnar incisura of the radius were the least variable. The palmar and dorsal ends of the ridge delineating the scaphoid and lunate facets were the most variable. Only 1 of the radial inclination measurement methods was clinically acceptable; the others had a repeatability and reproducibility limit of >2°, making those measurements clinically unacceptable. The use of isolated points seems insufficient for the development of a wrist reference frame, especially for the purpose of measuring dorsopalmar tilt. If one concurs that an error of 2° is unacceptable for all distal radial measurements, then clinicians should avoid using 3D landmarked points, due to their unreliability, except for radial inclination measured using the radial styloid and the midpoint of the ulnar edge of the radius. A characterization of the wrist using 3D shapes that fit the articular surface of the radius should be considered. Diagnostic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.