Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging of physeal injury: reliability and clinical utility


Lurie, Brett; Koff, Matthew F; Shah, Parina; Feldman, Eric; Amacker, Nadja; Downey-Zayas, Timothy; Green, Daniel; Potter, Hollis G (2014). Three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging of physeal injury: reliability and clinical utility. Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics, 34(3):239-245.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Injuries to the physis are common in children with a subset resulting in an osseous bar and potential growth disturbance. Magnetic resonance imaging allows for detailed assessment of the physis with the ability to generate 3-dimensional physeal models from volumetric data. The purpose of this study was to assess the interrater reliability of physeal bar area measurements generated using a validated semiautomated segmentation technique and to highlight the clinical utility of quantitative 3-dimensional (3D) physeal mapping in pediatric orthopaedic practice. METHODS: The Radiology Information System/Picture Archiving Communication System (PACS) at our institution was searched to find consecutive patients who were imaged for the purpose of assessing a physeal bar or growth disturbance between December 2006 and October 2011. Physeal segmentation was retrospectively performed by 2 independent operators using semiautomated software to generate physeal maps and bar area measurements from 3-dimensional spoiled gradient recalled echo sequences. Inter-reliability was statistically analyzed. Subsequent surgical management for each patient was recorded from the patient notes and surgical records. RESULTS: We analyzed 24 patients (12M/12F) with a mean age of 11.4 years (range, 5-year to 15-year olds) and 25 physeal bars. Of the physeal bars: 9 (36%) were located in the distal tibia; 8 (32%) in the proximal tibia; 5 (20%) in the distal femur; 1 (4%) in the proximal femur; 1 (4%) in the proximal humerus; and 1 (4%) in the distal radius. The independent operator measurements of physeal bar area were highly correlated with a Pearson correlation coefficient (r) of 0.96 and an intraclass correlation coefficient for average measures of 0.99 (95% confidence interval, 0.97-0.99). Four patients underwent resection of the identified physeal bars, 9 patients were treated with epiphysiodesis, and 1 patient underwent bilateral tibial osteotomies. CONCLUSIONS: Semiautomated segmentation of the physis is a reproducible technique for generating physeal maps and accurately measuring physeal bars, providing quantitative and anatomic information that may inform surgical management and prognosis in patients with physeal injury.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Injuries to the physis are common in children with a subset resulting in an osseous bar and potential growth disturbance. Magnetic resonance imaging allows for detailed assessment of the physis with the ability to generate 3-dimensional physeal models from volumetric data. The purpose of this study was to assess the interrater reliability of physeal bar area measurements generated using a validated semiautomated segmentation technique and to highlight the clinical utility of quantitative 3-dimensional (3D) physeal mapping in pediatric orthopaedic practice. METHODS: The Radiology Information System/Picture Archiving Communication System (PACS) at our institution was searched to find consecutive patients who were imaged for the purpose of assessing a physeal bar or growth disturbance between December 2006 and October 2011. Physeal segmentation was retrospectively performed by 2 independent operators using semiautomated software to generate physeal maps and bar area measurements from 3-dimensional spoiled gradient recalled echo sequences. Inter-reliability was statistically analyzed. Subsequent surgical management for each patient was recorded from the patient notes and surgical records. RESULTS: We analyzed 24 patients (12M/12F) with a mean age of 11.4 years (range, 5-year to 15-year olds) and 25 physeal bars. Of the physeal bars: 9 (36%) were located in the distal tibia; 8 (32%) in the proximal tibia; 5 (20%) in the distal femur; 1 (4%) in the proximal femur; 1 (4%) in the proximal humerus; and 1 (4%) in the distal radius. The independent operator measurements of physeal bar area were highly correlated with a Pearson correlation coefficient (r) of 0.96 and an intraclass correlation coefficient for average measures of 0.99 (95% confidence interval, 0.97-0.99). Four patients underwent resection of the identified physeal bars, 9 patients were treated with epiphysiodesis, and 1 patient underwent bilateral tibial osteotomies. CONCLUSIONS: Semiautomated segmentation of the physis is a reproducible technique for generating physeal maps and accurately measuring physeal bars, providing quantitative and anatomic information that may inform surgical management and prognosis in patients with physeal injury.

Statistics

Citations

4 citations in Web of Science®
9 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

22 downloads since deposited on 14 Nov 2013
16 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Clinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:2014
Deposited On:14 Nov 2013 14:41
Last Modified:05 Apr 2016 17:09
Publisher:Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins
ISSN:0271-6798
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1097/BPO.0000000000000104
PubMed ID:24096448

Download

Preview Icon on Download
Preview
Content: Published Version
Filetype: PDF
Size: 322kB
View at publisher