4.4 Article

3D CT segmentation of CAM type femoroacetabular impingement-reliability and relationship of CAM lesion with anthropomorphic features

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY
Volume 91, Issue 1092, Pages -

Publisher

BRITISH INST RADIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20180371

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Evaluate feasibility and reliability of 3DCT semi-automatic segmentation and volumetrics of CAM lesions in femoroacetabular impingement and determine correlations with anthropometrics. Methods: Consecutive series of 43 patients with CAM type FAI underwent 3DCT. 20 males and 23 females (30 unilateral and 13 bilateral symptomatic hips) were included. 56 CAM lesions and femoral heads were segmented by two readers. Radial images were obtained for alpha angles. Pearson and ICC correlations were used for analysis. Results: In 43 patients (male: female = 1: 1.15), mean +/- SD of age, height, BMI were 36.6 +/- 11.47 years, 1.72 +/- 0.10 meters and 26.25 +/- 4.31 kg m(-2). Femoral head and bumps were segmented in 4 min. Inter reader reliability was good to excellent for volumetrics and poor for alpha angles. Mean +/- SD of CAM lesion and femoral head volumes were significantly higher (6.7 +/- 2.5 cc(3) and 62.9 +/- 10.8 cc(3)) among males than females (p < 0.001) and with increasing patient height (Pearson correlation and p-values = 0.45, 0.0006; 0.82, < 0.0001 respectively). Conclusion: Volumetric analysis of CAM lesion shows better inter reader reliability than alpha angle measurements. CAM and femoral head volumes exhibit significant correlations with patient heights that may aid in pre-operative planning for femoroplasty. Advances in knowledge: Femoral head & CAM volumes are segmented three times faster than alpha angles with superior inter reader reliability than alpha angles. Femoral head & CAM volumes are significantly larger in males and positively correlate with patients' heights.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available