Loading…

Development, construction, and validation of a thinner uniplanar calibration cage for radiostereometry

Radiostereometric analysis (RSA) is an accurate and precise radiographic method that can be used to measure micromotion of implants and study joint kinematics in vivo. A calibration cage with radiopaque markers is used to calibrate the RSA images; however, the thickness (250 mm) of the calibration c...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of orthopaedic research 2022-07, Vol.40 (7), p.1645-1653
Main Authors: Jürgens‐Lahnstein, Jonathan Hugo, Petersen, Emil Toft, Laursen, Mogens, Hauskov Iversen, Christian, Kaptein, Bart L., Lindgren, Lars, Stilling, Maiken
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Radiostereometric analysis (RSA) is an accurate and precise radiographic method that can be used to measure micromotion of implants and study joint kinematics in vivo. A calibration cage with radiopaque markers is used to calibrate the RSA images; however, the thickness (250 mm) of the calibration cage restricts the available area for the patient and equipment during RSA recordings. A thinner calibration cage would increase the recording area, facilitate handling of the cage, and ease integration of the cage with the RSA system. We developed a thinner calibration cage without compromise of accuracy and precision. First, we performed numerical simulations of an RSA system, and showed that the calibration cage thickness could be decreased to 140 mm maintaining accuracy and precision using 40 fiducial and 30 control markers. Second, we constructed a new calibration cage (NRT cage) according to the simulation results. Third, we validated the new calibration cage against two state‐of‐the‐art calibration cages (Umeaa cage and Leiden cage) in a phantom study. All cages performed similar for marker‐based analysis, except for y‐rotation, where the Umeaa cage (SD = 0.064 mm) was less precise compared to the NRT (SD = 0.038 mm) and Leiden cages (0.042 mm) (p = .01). For model‐based analysis the NRT cage had superior precision for translations (SD ≤ 0.054 mm) over the Leiden cage (SD ≤ 0.118 mm) and Umeaa cage (SD ≤ 0.093 mm) (p 
ISSN:0736-0266
1554-527X
DOI:10.1002/jor.25193