Validating rasterstereography to evaluate thoracic kyphosis in patients with Scheuermann’s disease

Ulysse Coneys, Anne Tabard-Fougère, Nathaly Gavira, Romain Dayer 

Spine Deform. 2024 Nov 4. doi: 10.1007/s43390-024-00955-3. Online ahead of print

Abstract

Purpose: Evaluate the validity of rasterstereography compared to low-dose, biplanar spine radiography for assessing thoracic kyphosis (TK) angles in Scheuermann’s disease patients.

Methods: This prospective study included all the Scheuermann’s disease patients consulting our clinic from 2016 to 2018. Recruited patients underwent two-dimensional low-dose biplanar anteroposterior full-length spine radiography and rasterstereography on the same day. Relationships between the TK angles measured were evaluated using Pearson correlation coefficients. Agreement between radiographic and rasterstereographic TK angles was evaluated using two-way intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Bland-Altman plots. Proportional biases were assessed using the slope regression lines fitted to Bland-Altman plots.

Results: The mean demographic and radiological characteristics of the 52 patients (20 girls; 39%) included were: age 13.1 ± 2 years; BMI 17.3 ± 2.8; and TK max. 50.4° ± 10°. Rasterstereographic TK angles were strongly correlated with radiographic TK angles evaluated from T2-T12 (r = 0.677) and from C7-Max (r = 0.704), with ‘good’ agreement (ICC > 0.75). A proportional bias was revealed in the slope regression line fitted to the Bland-Altman plot from the C7-Max radiography and the rasterstereography measurements (p = 0.034) but not from the T2-T12 and rasterstereographic TK angles (p = 0.997).

Conclusion: Rasterstereography is a reliable means of quantifying TK angles in Scheuermann’s disease patients. It could directly reduce the number of radiographic scans patients need over time, minimising their radiation exposure.

Keywords: Radiation-free; Rasterstereography; Scheuermann’s disease; Thoracic kyphosis; Validation study.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39688706/

Degrees of curvature and height: is there a relationship?

The questions our patients ask us are often opportunities to provide useful information to them and others.

Francesco’s questions prompted us to examine the possible correlation between scoliosis, degrees of curvature, and height growth. 

“Let me start by describing my particular experience: at the age of 17 and a half, in a skiing accident, I injured my patellar tendon, which was operated on and then put in a brace for 30 days. Once I had recovered and regained full mobility, I had a physiatrist colleague of my father who examined me. During the examination, he measured my height (178 cm) and checked my back, remarking that I perhaps had very mild scoliosis (there was no talk of X-rays, much less of degrees of curvature and so on). Let’s just say that I took the information on board and left it at that.

This year I had a checkup with the same physiatrist, and on seeing me he was immediately struck by how much taller I had grown: he measured me, and I was 184 cm.

I’m sure I’m not unique, but I would guess it’s quite rare for a boy of 17 and a half to gain another 6 cm.

He looked at my back and told me it was “a bit worse”. I was quite upset about that because, being completely ignorant on the subject (like anyone who has no direct experience of this deformity), I had imagined it was something that could be remedied by improving my posture or through physical activity. He reassured me, telling me that by now it should have stabilised (“stable until proven otherwise” as you say) and not to worry about it too much. This time, though, he recommended an X-ray. 

What I learnt from the X-ray was that my latest growth had done me more harm than good and had seemingly affected the scoliosis more than anything. Also, at the initial examination I’d had a much chubbier, more child-like physique, which at the time might have helped to mask the scoliosis somewhat. Functionally, though, I have no pain (since, as you have told me, my curve is moderate), and fortunately, aesthetically it is not too noticeable.

So, here are my two questions:

  • Given that the human body generally declines with age, does that mean I am at risk of becoming, in the future, one of those old men you see with a walking stick, bent over and crooked? In other words, even though my scoliosis shouldn’t get worse in adulthood, am I more likely than someone without scoliosis to end up like the kind of elderly person I just described?  
  • Is there a relationship, however approximate, between the number of Cobb degrees and the number of cm lost in height? I have read that you lose 1 cm in height for every 10° of Cobb angle, and therefore that you can divide your degrees of curvature by 10 to work out how much height you’ve lost”.

Here is our response.

First of all, it’s not unusual for males to gain a few more centimetres after reaching the age of 17. In fact, height growth is linked to skeletal maturation, a process that in boys begins and therefore also ends a few years later than in girls. Scoliosis is a pathology that, to worsen, exploits bone growth, accentuating the vertebral deformity; this could explain the clinical findings from your latest examination.

As regards height “lost” due to scoliosis, I would say that having reached around 1.85 m, you can’t really complain …! That said, to answer your question, with a 30° curve you lose 1–1.5 cm at most.

Some international scientific journals have published mathematical formulas for calculating centimetres lost due to scoliotic curvature(s) of the spine.-

These calculations also take into account the ratio between height when seated (trunk and head) and height when standing.

The studies published on this topic evaluated scoliosis cohorts (between 140 and 1500 subjects enrolled) and reported an average height loss of 3.38 cm for females and 2.86 cm for males.

The formulas providing the most valid estimates of height loss are those of Kono and Stokes, according to which a scoliotic curve of 80° seems to lead to a loss of between 3.5 and 5.5 cm, while one of 100° appears to correspond to between 4.5 and 8.5 cm in lost height. The greater the curve, the more the estimates produced by the two formulas differ; instead, they give comparable results for smaller curves.

Patients with severe curves also tend to ask surgeons about height, but in terms of gain, asking: “How many extra cm of height will this operation give me?The answer to this question is less certain, because there are too many factors at play, so many in fact that no pre-surgical prediction can be considered reliable.

As for your concerns about adulthood and old age, you will understand that I can only reply in very general terms. With curves of around 30° at the end of growth, the risk of the condition worsening over future decades is very low.

It’s like someone with slightly raised cholesterol or high blood pressure asking me: am I going to have a heart attack in a few decades’ time? Although high cholesterol levels, systemic arterial hypertension, a sedentary lifestyle and other factors are associated with increased cardiovascular risk, it isn’t possible to translate estimates of the risks associated with a specific disease into a clear prediction for an individual case.  

In terms of prevention, in adults with scoliotic curves similar to yours, regular physical activity is recommended in order to maintain good general muscle tone, able to counteract the worsening effect that gravity would otherwise have on the curves over the years.

Is the information provided by large language models valid in educating patients about adolescent idiopathic scoliosis? An evaluation of content, clarity, and empathy: The perspective of the European Spine Study Group

Siegmund Lang, Jacopo Vitale, Fabio Galbusera, Tamás Fekete, Louis Boissiere, Yann Philippe Charles, Altug Yucekul, Caglar Yilgor, Susana Núñez-Pereira, Sleiman Haddad , Alejandro Gomez-Rice, Jwalant Mehta, Javier Pizones, Ferran Pellisé, Ibrahim Obeid, Ahmet Alanay, Frank Kleinstück, Markus Loibl ; ESSG European Spine Study Group

Spine Deform. 2024 Nov 4. doi: 10.1007/s43390-024-00955-3. Online ahead of print

Abstract

Purpose: Large language models (LLM) have the potential to bridge knowledge gaps in patient education and enrich patient-surgeon interactions. This study evaluated three chatbots for delivering empathetic and precise adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) related information and management advice. Specifically, we assessed the accuracy, clarity, and relevance of the information provided, aiming to determine the effectiveness of LLMs in addressing common patient queries and enhancing their understanding of AIS.

Methods: We sourced 20 webpages for the top frequently asked questions (FAQs) about AIS and formulated 10 critical questions based on them. Three advanced LLMs-ChatGPT 3.5, ChatGPT 4.0, and Google Bard-were selected to answer these questions, with responses limited to 200 words. The LLMs’ responses were evaluated by a blinded group of experienced deformity surgeons (members of the European Spine Study Group) from seven European spine centers. A pre-established 4-level rating system from excellent to unsatisfactory was used with a further rating for clarity, comprehensiveness, and empathy on the 5-point Likert scale. If not rated ‘excellent’, the raters were asked to report the reasons for their decision for each question. Lastly, raters were asked for their opinion towards AI in healthcare in general in six questions.

Results: The responses among all LLMs were ‘excellent’ in 26% of responses, with ChatGPT-4.0 leading (39%), followed by Bard (17%). ChatGPT-4.0 was rated superior to Bard and ChatGPT 3.5 (p = 0.003). Discrepancies among raters were significant (p < 0.0001), questioning inter-rater reliability. No substantial differences were noted in answer distribution by question (p = 0.43). The answers on diagnosis (Q2) and causes (Q4) of AIS were top-rated. The most dissatisfaction was seen in the answers regarding definitions (Q1) and long-term results (Q7). Exhaustiveness, clarity, empathy, and length of the answers were positively rated (> 3.0 on 5.0) and did not demonstrate any differences among LLMs. However, GPT-3.5 struggled with language suitability and empathy, while Bard’s responses were overly detailed and less empathetic. Overall, raters found that 9% of answers were off-topic and 22% contained clear mistakes.

Conclusion: Our study offers crucial insights into the strengths and weaknesses of current LLMs in AIS patient and parent education, highlighting the promise of advancements like ChatGPT-4.o and Gemini alongside the need for continuous improvement in empathy, contextual understanding, and language appropriateness.

Keywords: Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS); Artificial intelligence (AI); Large language models (LLMs); Patient education; Spine surgery.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39495402/

What imaging does my AIS patient need? A multi-group survey of provider preferences

Jenny L Zheng, Ying Li, Grant Hogue, Megan Johnson, Jason B Anari, Maia D Regan, Keith D Baldwin 

Spine Deform. 2024 Nov 4. doi: 10.1007/s43390-024-00995-9. Online ahead of print.

Abstract

Introduction: Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is a common diagnosis managed by pediatric orthopedic surgeons with nonoperative radiographic monitoring representing a cornerstone of treatment. Differences in practices and techniques for obtaining radiographic studies contribute to variation, cost of care, and hamper data aggregation. We surveyed several large organizations dedicated to children’s orthopedics or scoliosis care to obtain a consensus for radiographic evaluation of AIS.

Methods: A REDCap-based survey was developed across four institutions and beta-tested by staff and fellows from a single institution. The finalized survey was distributed to members of POSNA, PSSG, and SOSORT, and shared on social media. Participants were asked to rank the importance of various datapoints in radiographic assessment of the spinal deformity, skeletal maturity, and study indications during initial, subsequent, preoperative, and final office visits for AIS. Response rate for the overall group was 26%.

Results: Cobb angle was considered the most important (> 94%) radiographic index across all time points. For positioning, 46% of respondents favored arms bent touching clavicles as the ideal positioning for X-rays, and another 24% favored arms down with palms forward (Table 2). The majority of respondents obtain lateral X-rays at the first visit (99%) and at the preoperative visit (70%). At the preoperative visit, sagittal contour (86%), apex location (85%), and Lenke classification (73%) were considered important factors to record. Flexibility studies are primarily obtained at the preoperative visit (89%) and 81% of respondents prefer bending films as the flexibility technique of choice. Regarding measures of skeletal maturity, Sanders bone age was considered to be the most important by over 70% of respondents across initial, subsequent, preoperative and brace wean visits (Fig. 2). MRIs were obtained routinely by 34% of respondents and only when the patient had a concerning symptom or finding for 67% of respondents.

Conclusions: Despite large variations in radiographic examination of AIS, large areas of agreement were found. It is important to establish standards for positioning patients, evaluating skeletal maturity, and obtaining assessments including lateral views, flexibility studies, and advanced imaging. Establishing common practices for radiographic evaluation of AIS will allow for less variation in care and for critical questions to be answered through registry formation and large multicenter data collection.

Significance: This study establishes current practitioner opinion on the radiographic evaluation of the AIS patient. Minimum data sets are useful for data aggregation and answering research questions in the face of data variability.

Level of evidence: Level V.

Keywords: Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis; Imaging; Nonoperative; Radiography; Survey.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39495401/

Intelligenza artificiale: quale rivoluzione nel trattamento riabilitativo?

L’Intelligenza Artificiale (IA) sta trasformando il modo in cui i medici affrontano la riabilitazione, offrendo strumenti innovativi che migliorano la qualità dei trattamenti. In ISICO siamo sempre più impegnati a esplorare come l’IA possa supportare il lavoro clinico quotidiano e contribuire a decisioni terapeutiche sempre più personalizzate.
Ne abbiamo parlato con il dr. Francesco Negrini, fisiatra specialista di ISICO, autore nel 2023 della ricerca su AI e riabilitazione che si è aggiudicata il SOSORT AWARD (Developing a new tool for scoliosis screening in a tertiary specialistic setting using artificial intelligence: a retrospective study on 10,813 patients: 2023 SOSORT award winner). Negrini ha di recente presentato un’altra relazione su IA e progetti di utilizzo nella riabilitazione dello Stroke. 

Quali sono gli ambiti principali in cui lIA può essere utilizzata nella riabilitazione?
L’IA è incredibilmente versatile
. Può essere difatti applicata in molte fasi del processo medico: dalla diagnosi, attraverso l’analisi automatizzata di immagini radiografiche o RM per identificare patologie con maggiore precisione, alla prognosi, con previsioni sui risultati dei trattamenti, fino alla  personalizzazione dei trattamenti, per determinare il percorso terapeutico più efficace basato sui dati del paziente e al monitoraggio continuo, così da valutare in tempo reale i progressi del paziente per adattare il trattamento. In ISICO, per esempio, stiamo studiando come l’IA possa supportare la personalizzazione del trattamento. Con questa tecnologia si potrebbero analizzare la storia naturale del paziente e le probabilità di successo nell’utilizzo di un corsetto rispetto a un altro, fornendo al medico strumenti decisionali più accurati.

Ci può fare un esempio concreto di come ISICO sta utilizzando lIA?
Un esempio significativo è la ricerca premiata con il SOSORT Award 2023, pubblicata recentemente. Lo studio ha dimostrato come l’analisi dei dati clinici attraverso tecniche avanzate possa migliorare la comprensione della scoliosi e dei suoi trattamenti. Un altro possibile utilizzo riguarda la diagnosi della lombalgia, dove l’IA può analizzare immagini radiografiche per identificare eziologie che altrimenti potrebbero sfuggire all’occhio umano. Questo approccio sfrutta la maggiore potenza di calcolo disponibile oggi, che permette di processare grandi quantità di dati in modo rapido e accurato.

Come lIA potrebbe cambiare la gestione delle patologie vertebrali in futuro?
Ci sono tre aree chiave in cui vediamo un enorme potenziale: screening e diagnosi precoce che significa rilevare la scoliosi o altre condizioni in una fase iniziale, migliorando gli esiti del trattamento; personalizzazione dei corsetti, ossia utilizzare i dati raccolti nei centri clinici per prevedere quale tipo di corsetto sarà più efficace per un determinato paziente; monitoraggio dei risultati, così da tracciare l’andamento della terapia e adattarla in base ai progressi osservati, migliorando l’efficacia del trattamento.

Cosa rende lAI un alleato così prezioso per i clinici?
L’IA amplifica le capacità del clinico, fornendo informazioni più dettagliate e aiutandolo a prendere decisioni basate sui dati. Tuttavia, come sottolineiamo sempre in ISICO, il rapporto medico-paziente rimane centrale. L’IA non sostituisce l’esperienza e l’empatia del medico; piuttosto offre strumenti che migliorano il lavoro umano.

Qual è il futuro dellIA in medicina riabilitativa?
Credo che vedremo un’integrazione sempre più stretta. In ISICO ci stiamo muovendo in questa direzione, esplorando come utilizzare l’IA per migliorare i risultati terapeutici e rendere la riabilitazione più mirata. Siamo solo all’inizio, ma le possibilità sono enormi, soprattutto se riusciamo a combinare il meglio della tecnologia con la preziosa competenza umana.

Scientific Exercise Approach to Scoliosis in Adolescents With Mild Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Controlled Clinical Trial

Gözde Yagcı, Halil Gökhan Demirkıran 

J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2024 Oct 14:S0161-4754(24)00053-8.doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2024.08.015

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of Scientific Exercise Approach to Scoliosis (SEAS) protocol for patients with mild adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS).

Method: (A controlled clinical trial) This preliminary study included 32 patients with AIS, aged 10 to 16 years, with Cobb angles ranging from 12° to 25°. The participants were divided into 2 groups: the SEAS group (n = 21) and standard care (n = 11). We assessed Cobb angles via radiographs, axial trunk rotation using the Adams test, spinal deformity from various perspectives with the Spinal Appearance Questionnaire (SAQ), and health-related quality of life with the Scoliosis Research Society-22 (SRS-22) questionnaire, both before and after 1 year of treatment.

Results: Repeated measure-ANOVA revealed significant group x time interactions for various parameters: Cobb angle (F1,30 = 35.757; P < .001), axial trunk rotation (F1,30 = 39.595; P < .001), SAQ appearance domain for the physiotherapist (F1,30 = 53.943; P < .001), SAQ appearance (F1,30= 14.054; P = .001), expectations (F1,30 = 9.103; P = .005) domains, the total score (F1,30 = 23.574; P < .001) for the child, and the SAQ appearance domain for the parent (F1,29 = 5.412; P = .027). There were no significant differences in SRS-22 scores between the 2 groups. The success rates for the SEAS group and the standard care group were 100% and 72.7%, respectively.

Conclusion: After 1 year, the group of patients with mild AIS who received the SEAS method showed greater improvements in the Cobb angle, axial trunk rotation, and spinal appearance than those who received standard care. This preliminary study suggests that larger trials should be completed.

Keywords: Body; Exercise Therapy; Physical Appearance; Quality of Life; Scoliosis.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39412452/

Scoliosis X-rays: Why We No Longer Use Old Protections

The use of protective devices intended to shield the foetus and gonads of the patient during X-ray imaging should be discontinued as a routine practice since it can compromise its benefits. This recommendation, published in April 2019 by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine AAPM represents a historic change.

Why, after more than 70 years of gonadal protection, have we reached this conclusion?
Let’s take a closer look. At ISICO, this topic is particularly important to us because we need to visualise the spine to offer the best therapies for scoliosis and assess its progress properly. Thus, while we reduce requests as much as possible, it’s almost always necessary to prescribe complete spine X-rays in one projection (either frontal or lateral) at least once a year.

Why This Change? There Are Two Reasons:

  1. Minimal or No Benefits from Protections
    Current scientific evidence shows that these protections provide minimal or no health benefits to patients. In the past, it was believed that radiation could damage reproductive cells, potentially harming future offspring. However, it has been discovered that reproductive cells are much less sensitive to radiation than previously thought, and there is no evidence that the very low doses currently used in diagnostic imaging can harm reproductive cells or the foetus. Radiation is not harmful to the foetus, even when a radiographic exam on a pregnant patient is necessary and indispensable.
  2. Negative Impact on Exam Effectiveness
    The protective equipment can obscure anatomy or significant pathologies or produce artefacts that require repeating the exam, thereby substantially increasing the dose. Additionally, most modern X-ray equipment can automatically adjust the amount of radiation used based on the body region being examined. Lead-equivalent individual protection in the field of view could lead to a significant and unjustified increase in the patient’s dose. These technological advancements have made patient shielding a practice that introduces more risks than benefits.

In line with this evidence, at ISICO, we discourage using these protections as they could potentially be harmful.

Prognostic model development for risk of curve progression in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a prospective cohort study of 127 patients

Marlene Dufvenberg, Anastasios Charalampidis, Elias Diarbakerli, Birgitta Öberg , Hans Tropp, Anna Aspberg Ahl, Daphne Wezenberg, Henrik Hedevik, Hans Möller, Paul Gerdhem, Allan Abbott

Acta Ortho. 2024 Sep 13:95:536-544.doi: 10.2340/17453674.2024.41911

Abstract

Background and purpose: The study’s purpose was to develop and internally validate a prognostic survival model exploring baseline variables for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis curve progression.

Methods: A longitudinal prognostic cohort analysis was performed on trial data (n = 135) including girls and boys, Cobb angle 25-40°, aged 9-17 years, remaining growth > 1 year, and previously untreated. Prognostic outcome was defined as curve progression of Cobb angle of > 6° prior to skeletal maturity. 34 candidate prognostic variables were tested. Time-to-event was measured with 6-month intervals. Cox proportional hazards regression survival model (CoxPH) was used for model development and validation in comparison with machine learning models (66.6/33.3 train/test data set). The models were adjusted for treatment exposure.

Results: The final primary prognostic model included 127 patients, predicting progress with acceptable discriminative ability (concordance = 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72-0.86). Significant prognostic risk factors were Risser stage of 0 (HR 4.6, CI 2.1-10.1, P < 0.001), larger major curve Cobb angle (HRstandardized 1.5, CI 1.1-2.0, P = 0.005), and higher score on patient-reported pictorial Spinal Appearance Questionnaire (pSAQ) (HRstandardized 1.4, CI 1.0-1.9, P = 0.04). Treatment exposure, entered as a covariate adjustment, contributed significantly to the final model (HR 3.1, CI 1.5-6.0, P = 0.001). Sensitivity analysis displayed that CoxPH maintained acceptable discriminative ability (AUC 0.79, CI 0.65-0.93) in comparison with machine learning algorithms.

Conclusion: The prognostic model (Risser stage, Cobb angle, pSAQ, and menarche) predicted curve progression of > 6° Cobb angle with acceptable discriminative ability. Adding patient report of the pSAQ may be of clinical importance for the prognosis of curve progression.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39287215/

The application of machine learning methods for predicting the progression of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a systematic review

Lening Li, Man-Sang Wong 

Skeletal Radiol. 2024 Aug;53(8):1517-1528.doi: 10.1007/s00256-024-04592-9. Epub 2024 Feb 21.

Abstract

Predicting curve progression during the initial visit is pivotal in the disease management of patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS)-identifying patients at high risk of progression is essential for timely and proactive interventions. Both radiological and clinical factors have been investigated as predictors of curve progression. With the evolution of machine learning technologies, the integration of multidimensional information now enables precise predictions of curve progression. This review focuses on the application of machine learning methods to predict AIS curve progression, analyzing 15 selected studies that utilize various machine learning models and the risk factors employed for predictions. Key findings indicate that machine learning models can provide higher precision in predictions compared to traditional methods, and their implementation could lead to more personalized patient management. However, due to the model interpretability and data complexity, more comprehensive and multi-center studies are needed to transition from research to clinical practice.

Keywords: Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis; Machine learning; Prediction.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39118179/

Distances and angles in standing long-leg radiographs: comparing conventional radiography, digital radiography, and EOS

Christof Birkenmaier, Louise Levrard , Carolin Melcher , Bernd Wegener, Jens Ricke, Boris M Holzapfel, Andrea Baur-Melnyk , Dirk Mehrens 

Skeletal Radiol. 2024 Aug;53(8):1517-1528.doi: 10.1007/s00256-024-04592-9. Epub 2024 Feb 21.

Abstract

Objective: Distances and angles measured from long-leg radiographs (LLR) are important for surgical decision-making. However, projectional radiography suffers from distortion, potentially generating differences between measurement and true anatomical dimension. These phenomena are not uniform between conventional radiography (CR) digital radiography (DR) and fan-beam technology (EOS). We aimed to identify differences between these modalities in an experimental setup.

Materials and methods: A hemiskeleton was stabilized using an external fixator in neutral, valgus and varus knee alignment. Ten images were acquired for each alignment and each modality: one CR setup, two different DR systems, and an EOS. A total of 1680 measurements were acquired and analyzed.

Results: We observed great differences for dimensions and angles between the 4 modalities. Femoral head diameter measurements varied in the range of > 5 mm depending on the modality, with EOS being the closest to the true anatomical dimension. With functional leg length, a difference of 8.7% was observed between CR and EOS and with the EOS system being precise in the vertical dimension on physical-technical grounds, this demonstrates significant projectional magnification with CR-LLR. The horizontal distance between the medial malleoli varied by 20 mm between CR and DR, equating to 21% of the mean.

Conclusions: Projectional distortion resulting in variations approaching 21% of the mean indicate, that our confidence on measurements from standing LLR may not be justified. It appears likely that among the tested equipment, EOS-generated images are closest to the true anatomical situation most of the time.

Keywords: Cone-beam; Conventional radiography; Digital radiography; Distortion; EOS; Fan-beam; Lower extremity; Projectional distortion; Slot-scanner; Valgus; Varus.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38378861/