Twin robotic x-ray system in small bone and joint trauma: impact of cone-beam computed tomography on treatment decisions

Jan-Peter Grunz, Lenhard Pennig, Tabea Fieber, Carsten Herbert Gietzen, Julius Frederik Heidenreich, Henner Huflage, Philipp Gruschwitz, Philipp Josef Kuhl, Bernhard Petritsch, Aleksander Kosmala, Thorsten Alexander Bley, Tobias Gassenmaier, Jan-Peter Grunz, Lenhard Pennig, Tabea Fieber, Carsten Herbert Gietzen, Julius Frederik Heidenreich, Henner Huflage, Philipp Gruschwitz, Philipp Josef Kuhl, Bernhard Petritsch, Aleksander Kosmala, Thorsten Alexander Bley, Tobias Gassenmaier

Abstract

Objectives: Trauma evaluation of extremities can be challenging in conventional radiography. A multi-use x-ray system with cone-beam CT (CBCT) option facilitates ancillary 3-D imaging without repositioning. We assessed the clinical value of CBCT scans by analyzing the influence of additional findings on therapy.

Methods: Ninety-two patients underwent radiography and subsequent CBCT imaging with the twin robotic scanner (76 wrist/hand/finger and 16 ankle/foot/toe trauma scans). Reports by on-call radiologists before and after CBCT were compared regarding fracture detection, joint affliction, comminuted injuries, and diagnostic confidence. An orthopedic surgeon recommended therapy based on reported findings. Surgical reports (N = 52) and clinical follow-up (N = 85) were used as reference standard.

Results: CBCT detected more fractures (83/64 of 85), joint involvements (69/53 of 71), and multi-fragment situations (68/50 of 70) than radiography (all p < 0.001). Six fractures suspected in radiographs were ruled out by CBCT. Treatment changes based on additional information from CBCT were recommended in 29 patients (31.5%). While agreement between advised therapy before CBCT and actual treatment was moderate (κ = 0.41 [95% confidence interval 0.35-0.47]; p < 0.001), agreement after CBCT was almost perfect (κ = 0.88 [0.83-0.93]; p < 0.001). Diagnostic confidence increased considerably for CBCT studies (p < 0.001). Median effective dose for CBCT was 4.3 μSv [3.3-5.3 μSv] compared to 0.2 μSv [0.1-0.2 μSv] for radiography.

Conclusions: CBCT provides advantages for the evaluation of acute small bone and joint trauma by detecting and excluding extremity fractures and fracture-related findings more reliably than radiographs. Additional findings induced therapy change in one third of patients, suggesting substantial clinical impact.

Key points: • With cone-beam CT, extremity fractures and fracture-related findings can be detected and ruled out more reliably than with conventional radiography. • Additional diagnostic information provided by cone-beam CT scans has substantial impact on therapy in small bone and joint trauma. • For distal extremity injury assessment, one-stop-shop imaging without repositioning is feasible with the twin robotic x-ray system.

Keywords: Cone-beam computed tomography; Extremities; Fractures, bone; Radiography.

Conflict of interest statement

Jan-Peter Grunz is a research consultant for Siemens Healthineers. The authors of this manuscript declare no further relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow chart for visualization of study inclusion/exclusion criteria, study population, and individual steps of the data analysis
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Display of the tableside scan position for wrist imaging with the twin robotic x-ray system
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
A 55-year-old woman presented to the emergency department with radial-sided left wrist pain and swelling after slipping during yoga class. Initial radiography was deemed negative for fracture presence (a). Subsequent cone-beam CT demonstrated a subtle fracture line in the waist of the scaphoid bone (arrowhead), corresponding to a potentially unstable B2 fracture (b). Suggested treatment was upgraded to surgery; however, the patient decided for conservative therapy. MRI follow-up after 1 week confirmed the fracture diagnosis, depicting extensive bone bruise in the distal portion of the scaphoid (c)
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
A 22-year-old male sprinter was admitted with increasing left ankle pain after an acute sprain in training. He was unable to bear weight on the left foot and stated pressure pain over the proximal first metatarsal. No fracture could be located in anteroposterior and lateral x-ray scans (a, b), whereas ensuing cone-beam CT depicted a medial avulsion fracture of the left navicular bone (c, d). Treatment was upgraded to cast immobilization
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
After a fall on the outstretched hand, x-rays of a 63-year-old man exhibited a distal radius fracture with metaphyseal impaction (a). While articular surface affliction could not be ascertained in radiography, the cone-beam CT scan demonstrated involvement of the radiocarpal and distal radioulnar joint (b). Open reduction was advised irrespective of CT imaging and the reported impaction of the lunate fossa was corrected intraoperatively
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
While unloading a truck, a 51-year-old man fell from approximately 2 m height onto his head and right hip. Also reporting right wrist pain, a simple non-displaced fracture of the radial styloid was surmised after radiography (a). Coronal reformatting of subsequent cone-beam CT (b) confirmed the suspected injury, whereas axial view (d) disclosed additional fracture lines in the articular surface of the distal radius. Coronal and axial multiplanar reconstructions of 3-D dual-echo steady-state MRI (c, e) validated cone-beam CT findings. Treatment was upgraded from immobilization to surgery

References

    1. Court-Brown CM, Caesar B. Epidemiology of adult fractures: a review. Injury. 2006;37:691–697. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2006.04.130.
    1. Bancroft LW, Kransdorf MJ, Adler R, et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria acute trauma to the foot. J Am Coll Radiol. 2015;12:575–581. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2015.02.018.
    1. Mosher TJ, Kransdorf MJ, Adler R, et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria acute trauma to the ankle. J Am Coll Radiol. 2015;12:221–227. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2014.11.015.
    1. Torabi M, Lenchik L, Beaman FD, et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® acute hand and wrist trauma. J Am Coll Radiol. 2019;16:S7–S17. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2019.02.029.
    1. Ricci PM, Boldini M, Bonfante E, et al. Cone-beam computed tomography compared to X-ray in diagnosis of extremities bone fractures: a study of 198 cases. Eur J Radiol Open. 2019;6:119–121. doi: 10.1016/j.ejro.2019.01.009.
    1. De Smet E, De Praeter G, Verstraete KLA, et al. Direct comparison of conventional radiography and cone-beam CT in small bone and joint trauma. Skeletal Radiol. 2015;44:1111–1117. doi: 10.1007/s00256-015-2127-3.
    1. Brink M, Steenbakkers A, Holla M, et al. Single-shot CT after wrist trauma: impact on detection accuracy and treatment of fractures. Skeletal Radiol. 2019;48:949–957. doi: 10.1007/s00256-018-3097-z.
    1. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography — an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:2277–2284. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra072149.
    1. Vanhoenacker F, Desimpel J. Cone beam CT of trauma of small bones and joints. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol. 2017;21:290–302. doi: 10.1055/s-0037-1606134.
    1. Konda SR, Goch AM, Haglin J, Egol KA. Ultralow-dose CT (REDUCTION protocol) for extremity fracture evaluation is as safe and effective as conventional CT. J Orthop Trauma. 2018;32:216–222. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000001137.
    1. Alagic Z, Bujila R, Enocson A, Srivastava S, Koskinen SK (2020) Ultra-low-dose CT for extremities in an acute setting: initial experience with 203 subjects. Skeletal Radiol 49:531–539
    1. Posadzy M, Desimpel J, Vanhoenacker F. Cone beam CT of the musculoskeletal system: clinical applications. Insights Imaging. 2018;9:35–45. doi: 10.1007/s13244-017-0582-1.
    1. Veldhoen S, Schöllchen M, Hanken H, et al. Performance of cone-beam computed tomography and multidetector computed tomography in diagnostic imaging of the midface: a comparative study on Phantom and cadaver head scans. Eur Radiol. 2017;27:790–800. doi: 10.1007/s00330-016-4387-2.
    1. Huang AJ, Chang CY, Thomas BJ, MacMahon PJ, Palmer WE (2015) Using cone-beam CT as a low-dose 3D imaging technique for the extremities: initial experience in 50 subjects. Skeletal Radiol 44:797–809
    1. Carrino JA, Al Muhit A, Zbijewski W, et al. Dedicated cone-beam CT system for extremity imaging. Radiology. 2014;270:816–824. doi: 10.1148/radiol.13130225.
    1. Zbijewski W, De Jean P, Prakash P, et al. A dedicated cone-beam CT system for musculoskeletal extremities imaging: design, optimization, and initial performance characterization. Med Phys. 2011;38:4700–4713. doi: 10.1118/1.3611039.
    1. Demehri S, Muhit A, Zbijewski W, et al. Assessment of image quality in soft tissue and bone visualization tasks for a dedicated extremity cone-beam CT system. Eur Radiol. 2015;25:1742–1751. doi: 10.1007/s00330-014-3546-6.
    1. Pallaver A, Honigmann P. The role of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan for detection and follow-up of traumatic wrist pathologies. J Hand Surg Am. 2019;44:1081–1087. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2019.07.014.
    1. Gibney B, Smith M, Moughty A, Kavanagh EC, Hynes D, MacMahon PJ (2019) Incorporating cone-beam CT into the diagnostic algorithm for suspected radiocarpal fractures: a new standard of care? Am J Roentgenol 213:1117–1123
    1. Hirschmann A, Pfirrmann CWA, Klammer G, Espinosa N, Buck FM (2014) Upright cone CT of the hindfoot: comparison of the non-weight-bearing with the upright weight-bearing position. Eur Radiol 24:553–558
    1. Grunz J-P, Kunz AS, Gietzen CH, et al. 3D cone-beam CT of the ankle using a novel twin robotic X-ray system: assessment of image quality and radiation dose. Eur J Radiol. 2019;119:108659. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.108659.
    1. Grunz J-P, Gietzen CH, Kunz AS, et al. Twin robotic X-ray system for 3D cone-beam CT of the wrist: an evaluation of image quality and radiation dose. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2020;214:422–427. doi: 10.2214/AJR.19.21911.
    1. Falkowski AL, Kovacs BK, Schwartz FR, Benz RM, Stieltjes B, Hirschmann A (2020) Comparison of 3D X-ray tomography with computed tomography in patients with distal extremity fractures. Skeletal Radiol 49(12):1965–1975
    1. Hart D, Wall B (2002) Radiation exposure of the UK population from medical and dental X-ray examinations. Natl Radiol Prot Board UK NRPB-W4
    1. Saltybaeva N, Jafari ME, Hupfer M, Kalender WA. Estimates of effective dose for CT scans of the lower extremities. Radiology. 2014;273:153–159. doi: 10.1148/radiol.14132903.
    1. Massey FJ. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for goodness of fit. J Am Stat Assoc. 1951;46:68–78. doi: 10.1080/01621459.1951.10500769.
    1. Wilcoxon F. Individual comparisons by ranking methods. Biom Bull. 1945;1:80. doi: 10.2307/3001968.
    1. Mann HB, Whitney DR. On a test of whether one of two random variables is stochastically larger than the other. Ann Math Stat. 1947;18:50–60. doi: 10.1214/aoms/1177730491.
    1. McNemar Q. Note on the sampling error of the difference between correlated proportions or percentages. Psychometrika. 1947;12:153–157. doi: 10.1007/BF02295996.
    1. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas. 1960;20:37–46. doi: 10.1177/001316446002000104.
    1. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159. doi: 10.2307/2529310.
    1. Yi JW, Park HJ, Lee SY, et al. Radiation dose reduction in multidetector CT in fracture evaluation. Br J Radiol. 2017;90:20170240. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20170240.
    1. Faccioli N, Foti G, Barillari M, Atzei A, Mucelli RP (2010) Finger fractures imaging: accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography and multislice computed tomography. Skeletal Radiol 39:1087–1095
    1. Nardi C, Salerno S, Molteni R, et al. Radiation dose in non-dental cone beam CT applications: a systematic review. Radiol Med. 2018;123:765–777. doi: 10.1007/s11547-018-0910-7.
    1. Brenner DJ, Doll R, Goodhead DT, et al. Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: assessing what we really know. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2003;100:13761–13766. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2235592100.
    1. Suresh P, Ninan T. Computed tomography of hand and wrist. In: Davies AM, Grainger AJ, James SJ, editors. Imaging of the hand and wrist - techniques and applications. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer; 2013. pp. 23–36.
    1. Müller FC, Gosvig KK, Børgesen H, et al. Dual-energy CT for suspected radiographically negative wrist fractures: a prospective diagnostic test accuracy study. Radiology. 2020;296:596–602. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020192701.
    1. Petritsch B, Kosmala A, Weng AM, et al. Vertebral compression fractures: third-generation dual-energy CT for detection of bone marrow edema at visual and quantitative analyses. Radiology. 2017;284:161–168. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017162165.
    1. Tuominen EKJ, Kankare J, Koskinen SK, Mattila KT. Weight-bearing CT imaging of the lower extremity. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;200:146–148. doi: 10.2214/AJR.12.8481.

Source: PubMed

3
订阅