Premium
Comparing CT to surface digitization‐based measurements of cartilage thickness
Author(s) -
Yeung Celine,
Willing Ryan,
Shan Hannah,
Lalone Emily,
Johnson Marjorie,
King Graham,
Athwal George S.
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
the faseb journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.709
H-Index - 277
eISSN - 1530-6860
pISSN - 0892-6638
DOI - 10.1096/fasebj.27.1_supplement.532.2
Subject(s) - calipers , cartilage , biomedical engineering , cadaveric spasm , materials science , anatomy , medicine , mathematics , geometry
Background Knowledge of cartilage thickness distribution is important for understanding the biomechanical properties of different joints. In recent studies, various techniques for measuring cartilage thickness have been assessed. Objective Compare the reliability of computed tomography (CT) and surface digitization‐based methods for measuring cartilage thickness. Methods Six cadaveric radii were CT scanned in air, barium sulfate, and iopamidol to determine which medium enabled optimal cartilage visualization. Images of cartilage in the best medium were used to generate three dimensional (3D) models for measurement. The radial heads were then digitized using an infrared motion tracking system. Cartilage thickness was measured as the distance from the deepest point on the cartilage surface to the bone. Both CT‐ and surface digitization‐based values were compared to physical measurements acquired using a digital caliper to determine which technique was most reliable for assessing cartilage thickness. Results CT and surface digitization had mean differences of −0.01±0.06mm (mean ± standard deviation) and 0.00±0.35mm, respectively. Surface digitization‐based measurements, however, had larger individual errors and a greater range of error (−0.42 to +0.62mm) compared to CT‐based measurements (−0.07 to +0.08mm). Conclusions CT is a more reliable technique for assessing cartilage thickness. Grant Funding Source : Departmental