Evaluation of computer-aided design software methods for assessment of the three-dimensional geometry of the canine radius

• Published in: American journal of veterinary research Vol. 82; no. 6; pp. 435 - 448
• Main Authors: Park, Karen M., Marcellin-Little, Denis J., Garcia, Tanya C.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: 01.06.2021
• Subjects: computer software; computer-aided design; dogs; geometry; humerus; radius (bone); veterinary medicine
• ISSN: 0002-9645; 1943-5681; 1943-5681
• DOI: 10.2460/ajvr.82.6.435

To describe methods to measure the 3-D orientation of the proximal, diaphyseal, and distal segments of the canine radius by use of computer-aided design software (CADS) and to compare the repeatability and reliability of measurements derived by those methods.OBJECTIVETo describe methods to measure the 3-D orientation of the proximal, diaphyseal, and distal segments of the canine radius by use of computer-aided design software (CADS) and to compare the repeatability and reliability of measurements derived by those methods.31 canine radii with biapical deformities and 24 clinically normal (control) canine radii.SAMPLE31 canine radii with biapical deformities and 24 clinically normal (control) canine radii.Select CT scans of radii were imported into a CADS program. Cartesian coordinate systems for the humerus and proximal, diaphyseal, and distal radial segments were developed. The orientation of each radial segment in the frontal, sagittal, and transverse planes was measured in triplicate by 3 methods. The repeatability and reliability of those measurements were calculated and compared among the 3 measurement methods.PROCEDURESSelect CT scans of radii were imported into a CADS program. Cartesian coordinate systems for the humerus and proximal, diaphyseal, and distal radial segments were developed. The orientation of each radial segment in the frontal, sagittal, and transverse planes was measured in triplicate by 3 methods. The repeatability and reliability of those measurements were calculated and compared among the 3 measurement methods.The mean ± SD within-subject repeatability of radial angular measurements for all 3 methods was 1.40 ± 0.67° in the frontal plane, 3.17 ± 2.21° in the sagittal plane, and 3.01 ± 1.11° in the transverse plane for control radii and 2.56 ± 1.95° in the frontal plane, 3.59 ± 2.39° in the sagittal plane, and 3.47 ± 1.19° in the transverse plane for abnormal radii. Mean ± SD bias between radial measurement methods was 1.88 ± 2.07° in the frontal plane, 6.44 ± 6.80° in the sagittal plane, and 2.27 ± 2.81° in the transverse plane.RESULTSThe mean ± SD within-subject repeatability of radial angular measurements for all 3 methods was 1.40 ± 0.67° in the frontal plane, 3.17 ± 2.21° in the sagittal plane, and 3.01 ± 1.11° in the transverse plane for control radii and 2.56 ± 1.95° in the frontal plane, 3.59 ± 2.39° in the sagittal plane, and 3.47 ± 1.19° in the transverse plane for abnormal radii. Mean ± SD bias between radial measurement methods was 1.88 ± 2.07° in the frontal plane, 6.44 ± 6.80° in the sagittal plane, and 2.27 ± 2.81° in the transverse plane.Results indicated that use of CADS to assess the 3-D orientation of the proximal, diaphyseal, and distal segments of normal and abnormal canine radii yielded highly repeatable and reliable measurements.CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCEResults indicated that use of CADS to assess the 3-D orientation of the proximal, diaphyseal, and distal segments of normal and abnormal canine radii yielded highly repeatable and reliable measurements.