Scholarlink

Purpose <p>To evaluate the accuracy of arthroscopic glenoid bone loss (GBL) assessment and its influencing factors, and to compare the consistency of three-dimensional computed tomography (3D CT) and 3D printed measurements.</p> Methods <p>3D printed models were created from the 3D CT images. Experts reviewed arthroscopic images to assess GBL, and a questionnaire was used to correlate assessment accuracy with surgeon age, experience, and annual surgical volume. Separately, ten residents measured each model three times using three methods: the linear method and best-fit circle method on 3D CT, and a manual method with vernier calipers on the physical models. Agreement was calculated using intra-group correlation coefficients (ICC).</p> Results <p>A statistically significant difference in assessment accuracy was found among surgeons with different annual surgical volumes (<i>p</i> = 0.029). Comparisons between the three measurement methods showed that the best-fit circle method yielded significantly higher values than both the linear and manual methods (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). The manual method demonstrated the highest consistency across different times and observers (ICC 0.998 and 0.995, respectively), suggesting it is the most stable technique.</p> Conclusion <p>The accuracy of arthroscopic GBL judgment varies with the surgeon’s annual surgical volume. While all three measurement methods show excellent agreement, the best-fit circle method provides significantly larger GBL measurements compared to the linear and manual methods.</p> Levels of Evidence <p>Level II, Cross-Sectional Study.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Surgeon experience and measurement method influence consistency of glenoid bone loss assessment: a three-dimensional printing, computed tomography, and arthroscopy comparison

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年3月9日

查看全文
  • Yuxin Xie,
  • Shoulong Song,
  • Fei Zhang,
  • Ziang Li,
  • Xiaolin Wang,
  • Wentao Xiong,
  • Yingguang Zhu,
  • Baofeng Zhao,
  • Qiang Zhang

摘要

Purpose

To evaluate the accuracy of arthroscopic glenoid bone loss (GBL) assessment and its influencing factors, and to compare the consistency of three-dimensional computed tomography (3D CT) and 3D printed measurements.

Methods

3D printed models were created from the 3D CT images. Experts reviewed arthroscopic images to assess GBL, and a questionnaire was used to correlate assessment accuracy with surgeon age, experience, and annual surgical volume. Separately, ten residents measured each model three times using three methods: the linear method and best-fit circle method on 3D CT, and a manual method with vernier calipers on the physical models. Agreement was calculated using intra-group correlation coefficients (ICC).

Results

A statistically significant difference in assessment accuracy was found among surgeons with different annual surgical volumes (p = 0.029). Comparisons between the three measurement methods showed that the best-fit circle method yielded significantly higher values than both the linear and manual methods (p < 0.001). The manual method demonstrated the highest consistency across different times and observers (ICC 0.998 and 0.995, respectively), suggesting it is the most stable technique.

Conclusion

The accuracy of arthroscopic GBL judgment varies with the surgeon’s annual surgical volume. While all three measurement methods show excellent agreement, the best-fit circle method provides significantly larger GBL measurements compared to the linear and manual methods.

Levels of Evidence

Level II, Cross-Sectional Study.