Centroid Method: Reliable Method to Determine the Coronal Curvature of Scoliosis A Case Control Study Comparing with the Cobb Method

被引:10
作者
Hong, Jae-Young [1 ]
Suh, Seung-Woo [1 ]
Modi, Hitesh N. [1 ]
Hur, Chang-Yong [2 ]
Song, Hae-Ryong [3 ]
Ryu, Joo-Hyung [3 ]
机构
[1] Korea Univ, Guro Hosp, Dept Orthoped, Scoliosis Res Inst, Seoul 152703, South Korea
[2] Korea Univ, Guro Hosp, Dept Spine Surg, Seoul 152703, South Korea
[3] Korea Univ, Guro Hosp, Rare Dis Inst, Seoul 152703, South Korea
关键词
adolescent idiopathic scoliosis; centroid method; Cobb method; radiographic measurement; ADOLESCENT IDIOPATHIC SCOLIOSIS; INTRAOBSERVER RELIABILITY; RADIOGRAPHIC-MEASUREMENT; CONGENITAL SCOLIOSIS; ANGLE MEASUREMENT; LUMBAR LORDOSIS; INTEROBSERVER; VARIABILITY; ACCURACY; CHILDREN;
D O I
10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181fde346
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Study Design. Observational study with three examiners. Objective. To compare the reliability of the Cobb and centroid methods. Summary of Background Data. The Cobb method is considered to be the gold standard in scoliosis measurement despite its low reliability. In adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients, the centroid method can be a good method for measuring scoliosis. Methods. Sixty whole spine postero-anterior radiographs were collected to compare the reliability of the Cobb and centroid methods in AIS patients. Sixty radiographs were measured twice by each of the three examiners using the two measurement methods. The data were analyzed statistically to determine the inter-and intraobserver reliability. Result. In comparisons of inter-and intraobserver reliability of all 60 radiographs, the inter-and intraclass coefficients (ICCs) were higher in the centroid (>0.969) than in the Cobb method (>0.832), although both were in the excellent range. The mean absolute difference (MAD) values were higher in the Cobb method (<7.15 degrees vs. <3.75 degrees), and >5 degrees in five comparisons. Regarding measures of mismatched radiograms, the inter-and intraobserver MAD values were higher in the Cobb method (<9.81 degrees vs. <3.82 degrees), and >5 degrees in six comparisons. And, the ICCs were higher in the centroid method (>0.972) than the Cobb method (>0.758). In immature radiograms, the ICCs were higher in the centroid (>0.973) than in the Cobb method (>0.764), even though it was in the excellent range. And, the inter-and intraobserver MAD values were higher in the Cobb method (<8.49 degrees vs. <3.99 degrees), and >5 degrees in seven comparisons. Conclusion. The centroid method is more reliable for measuring scoliosis in AIS than the Cobb method, and it can substitute the Cobb method, which showed high variability.
引用
收藏
页码:E855 / E861
页数:7
相关论文
共 26 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2001, SPINE, DOI DOI 10.1097/00007632-200106010-00003
[2]   MEASUREMENT OF SCOLIOSIS AND KYPHOSIS RADIOGRAPHS - INTRAOBSERVER AND INTEROBSERVER VARIATION [J].
CARMAN, DL ;
BROWNE, RH ;
BIRCH, JG .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 1990, 72A (03) :328-333
[3]   Vertebral centroid measurement of lumbar lordosis compared with the Cobb technique [J].
Chen, YL .
SPINE, 1999, 24 (17) :1786-1790
[4]   The reliability of quantitative analysis on digital images of the scoliotic spine [J].
Cheung, J ;
Wever, DJ ;
Veldhuizen, AG ;
Klein, JP ;
Verdonck, B ;
Nijlunsing, R ;
Cool, JC ;
Van Horn, JR .
EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2002, 11 (06) :535-542
[5]   Intra-observer reproducibility and interobserver reliability of the radiographic parameters in the Spinal Deformity Study Group's AIS Radiographic Measurement Manual [J].
Dang, NR ;
Moreau, MJ ;
Hill, DL ;
Mahood, JK ;
Raso, J .
SPINE, 2005, 30 (09) :1064-1069
[6]  
DUTTON K E, 1989, Australasian Physical and Engineering Sciences in Medicine, V12, P16
[7]   Measurement accuracy in congenital scoliosis [J].
Facanha, FAM ;
Winter, RB ;
Lonstein, JE ;
Koop, S ;
Novacheck, T ;
L'Heureux, EA ;
Noren, CA .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2001, 83A (01) :42-45
[8]   VERTEBRAL FRACTURE ASSESSMENT USING A SEMIQUANTITATIVE TECHNIQUE [J].
GENANT, HK ;
WU, CY ;
VANKUIJK, C ;
NEVITT, MC .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND MINERAL RESEARCH, 1993, 8 (09) :1137-1148
[9]   Inter- and intraobserver reliability assessment of the Cobb angle: manual versus digital measurement tools [J].
Gstoettner, Michaela ;
Sekyra, Katrin ;
Walochnik, Nadja ;
Winter, Peter ;
Wachter, Roland ;
Bach, Christian M. .
EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2007, 16 (10) :1587-1592
[10]  
Harrison D E, 2001, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), V26, pE227, DOI 10.1097/00007632-200106010-00002