FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2016356754> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2016356754 endingPage "583" @default.
• W2016356754 startingPage "577" @default.
• W2016356754 abstract "Hypothesis There is concern regarding the accuracy of 2-dimensional (2D) computed tomography (CT) for measuring glenoid version. Three-dimensional (3D) CT scan reconstructions can properly orient the glenoid to the plane of the scapula and have been reported to accurately measure glenoid version in cadaver models. We hypothesized that glenoid version measured by correcting 2D CT scans to the plane of the scapula by 3D reconstruction would be significantly different compared with standard 2D CT scan measurement of the glenoid in a clinical patient population. Materials and methods Thirty-four patients underwent dedicated axial 2D CT scan of the shoulder with 3D reconstruction. The 2D glenoid version was measured on unmodified midglenoid axial cuts, and the 3D glenoid version measurement was corrected to be perpendicular to the plane of the scapula and then measured in the axial plane. Three observers repeated each measurement on 2 different days. Results The difference between the overall average 2D and 3D measurements was not statistically significant (P = .45). In individual scapulae, 35% of 2D measurements were 5° to 10° different and 12% were greater than 10° different from their corresponding 3D-corrected CT measurement (P < .001 to P = .045). Reproducibility of both 2D and 3D-corrected measurements was good. Discussion Although 2D and 3D corrected methods showed a high degree of both intraobserver and interobserver reliability in this series, axial 2D images without correction were 5 to 15 degrees different than their 3D-corrected counterparts in 47% of all measurements. Correcting 2D glenoid version by 3D reconstruction to the transverse plane perpendicular to the scapular body allows for an accurate assessment of glenoid version in spite of positioning differences and results in increased accuracy while maintaining high reliability. Conclusions Owing to the variability in scapular position, the axial 2D CT scan measurement was significantly different from 3D-corrected measurement of glenoid version. Averaging the version measurements across patients did not reflect this finding. There is concern regarding the accuracy of 2-dimensional (2D) computed tomography (CT) for measuring glenoid version. Three-dimensional (3D) CT scan reconstructions can properly orient the glenoid to the plane of the scapula and have been reported to accurately measure glenoid version in cadaver models. We hypothesized that glenoid version measured by correcting 2D CT scans to the plane of the scapula by 3D reconstruction would be significantly different compared with standard 2D CT scan measurement of the glenoid in a clinical patient population. Thirty-four patients underwent dedicated axial 2D CT scan of the shoulder with 3D reconstruction. The 2D glenoid version was measured on unmodified midglenoid axial cuts, and the 3D glenoid version measurement was corrected to be perpendicular to the plane of the scapula and then measured in the axial plane. Three observers repeated each measurement on 2 different days. The difference between the overall average 2D and 3D measurements was not statistically significant (P = .45). In individual scapulae, 35% of 2D measurements were 5° to 10° different and 12% were greater than 10° different from their corresponding 3D-corrected CT measurement (P < .001 to P = .045). Reproducibility of both 2D and 3D-corrected measurements was good. Although 2D and 3D corrected methods showed a high degree of both intraobserver and interobserver reliability in this series, axial 2D images without correction were 5 to 15 degrees different than their 3D-corrected counterparts in 47% of all measurements. Correcting 2D glenoid version by 3D reconstruction to the transverse plane perpendicular to the scapular body allows for an accurate assessment of glenoid version in spite of positioning differences and results in increased accuracy while maintaining high reliability. Owing to the variability in scapular position, the axial 2D CT scan measurement was significantly different from 3D-corrected measurement of glenoid version. Averaging the version measurements across patients did not reflect this finding." @default.
• W2016356754 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2016356754 creator A5010111209 @default.
• W2016356754 creator A5010557193 @default.
• W2016356754 creator A5022843640 @default.
• W2016356754 creator A5065361103 @default.
• W2016356754 creator A5076403795 @default.
• W2016356754 creator A5085185311 @default.
• W2016356754 date "2011-06-01" @default.
• W2016356754 modified "2023-10-04" @default.
• W2016356754 title "Comparison of standard two-dimensional and three-dimensional corrected glenoid version measurements" @default.
• W2016356754 cites W1967196225 @default.
• W2016356754 cites W1978995334 @default.
• W2016356754 cites W2000355463 @default.
• W2016356754 cites W2000836479 @default.
• W2016356754 cites W2019383420 @default.
• W2016356754 cites W2039966533 @default.
• W2016356754 cites W2054403675 @default.
• W2016356754 cites W2066480911 @default.
• W2016356754 cites W2075801996 @default.
• W2016356754 cites W2077894383 @default.
• W2016356754 cites W2080209944 @default.
• W2016356754 cites W2087695919 @default.
• W2016356754 cites W2093468881 @default.
• W2016356754 cites W2102958340 @default.
• W2016356754 cites W2109435512 @default.
• W2016356754 cites W2109756827 @default.
• W2016356754 cites W2128353259 @default.
• W2016356754 cites W2139491204 @default.
• W2016356754 cites W2140060862 @default.
• W2016356754 cites W2142007476 @default.
• W2016356754 cites W2145574019 @default.
• W2016356754 cites W2167566833 @default.
• W2016356754 cites W2260665632 @default.
• W2016356754 cites W4235502736 @default.
• W2016356754 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2010.11.003" @default.
• W2016356754 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21324716" @default.
• W2016356754 hasPublicationYear "2011" @default.
• W2016356754 type Work @default.
• W2016356754 sameAs 2016356754 @default.
• W2016356754 citedByCount "163" @default.
• W2016356754 countsByYear W20163567542012 @default.
• W2016356754 countsByYear W20163567542013 @default.
• W2016356754 countsByYear W20163567542014 @default.
• W2016356754 countsByYear W20163567542015 @default.
• W2016356754 countsByYear W20163567542016 @default.
• W2016356754 countsByYear W20163567542017 @default.
• W2016356754 countsByYear W20163567542018 @default.
• W2016356754 countsByYear W20163567542019 @default.
• W2016356754 countsByYear W20163567542020 @default.
• W2016356754 countsByYear W20163567542021 @default.
• W2016356754 countsByYear W20163567542022 @default.
• W2016356754 countsByYear W20163567542023 @default.
• W2016356754 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2016356754 hasAuthorship W2016356754A5010111209 @default.
• W2016356754 hasAuthorship W2016356754A5010557193 @default.
• W2016356754 hasAuthorship W2016356754A5022843640 @default.
• W2016356754 hasAuthorship W2016356754A5065361103 @default.
• W2016356754 hasAuthorship W2016356754A5076403795 @default.
• W2016356754 hasAuthorship W2016356754A5085185311 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConcept C105702510 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConcept C105795698 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConcept C109950114 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConcept C126838900 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConcept C154945302 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConcept C163716698 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConcept C2779777117 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConcept C2780677649 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConcept C29694066 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConcept C2989005 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConcept C544519230 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConcept C91762617 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConcept C9893847 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConceptScore W2016356754C105702510 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConceptScore W2016356754C105795698 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConceptScore W2016356754C109950114 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConceptScore W2016356754C126838900 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConceptScore W2016356754C154945302 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConceptScore W2016356754C163716698 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConceptScore W2016356754C2779777117 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConceptScore W2016356754C2780677649 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConceptScore W2016356754C29694066 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConceptScore W2016356754C2989005 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConceptScore W2016356754C33923547 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConceptScore W2016356754C41008148 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConceptScore W2016356754C544519230 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConceptScore W2016356754C71924100 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConceptScore W2016356754C91762617 @default.
• W2016356754 hasConceptScore W2016356754C9893847 @default.
• W2016356754 hasIssue "4" @default.
• W2016356754 hasLocation W20163567541 @default.
• W2016356754 hasLocation W20163567542 @default.
• W2016356754 hasOpenAccess W2016356754 @default.
• W2016356754 hasPrimaryLocation W20163567541 @default.
• W2016356754 hasRelatedWork W1967977065 @default.

• next