Validation of digital radiology measurement tools for quantitative spinal imaging

Topics in Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 11-21

  Rampersaud, Y Raja ^a   Fehlings, Michael G ^a   Harrop, James S ^b   Kuklo, Timothy R ^c,d   Massicotte, Eric M ^a   Salonen, David ^a   Shaffrey, Christopher I ^e   Vaccaro, Alexander R ^f  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIFORMED SERVICES UNIVERSITY OF THE HEALTH SCIENCES   (United States)

^d WALTER REED ARMY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

^f THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Diagnostic imaging; Quantitative measurements; Spine; Validation

Indexed keywords

TITANIUM;

ARTICLE; ARTIFACT; CALIBRATION; CERVICAL SPINE; CERVICAL SPINE INJURY; CERVICAL SPINE RADIOGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY; HUMAN; MEASUREMENT; MODEL; PICTURE ARCHIVING AND COMMUNICATION SYSTEM; RADIOLOGIST; SPINE INJURY; SPINE SURGERY; SURGEON; VERTEBRA BODY; X RAY; X RAY FILM;

EID: 33745315231     PISSN: 10820744     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1310/64P8-R0WJ-QD9J-XBB7     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Carrino JA. Digital imaging overview. Semin Roentgenol. 2003;38(3):200-215.
2. Bennett WF, Tunstall KM, Skinner PW, Spigos DC. Delivering images to the operating room: a web-based solution. J Digit Imaging. 2002;15(Suppl 1):137-139. Epub 2002.
3. Lemke HU. PACS developments in Europe. Comput Med Imaging Graph. 2003;27(2-3):111-120.
4. Weatherburn CC, Ridout D, Strickland NH, et al. A comparison of conventional film, CR hard copy and PACS soft copy images of the chest: analyses of ROC curves and inter-observer agreement. Eur J Radiol. 2003;47(3):206-214.
5. Reiner BI, Siegel EL, Hooper FJ. Accuracy of interpretation of CT scans: comparing PACS monitor displays and hard-copy images. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;179(6):1407-1410.
6. Bozentka DJ, Beredjiklian PK, Westawski D, Steinberg DR. Digital radiographs in the assessment of distal radius fracture parameters. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002;(397):409-413.
7. Richards PJ. Cervical spine clearance: a review. Injury. 2005;36:248-269; discussion 270.
8. White SP, Shardlow DL. Effect of introduction of digital radiographic techniques on pre-operative templating in orthopaedic practice. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2005;87(1):53-54.
9. Conn KS, Clarke MT, Hallett JP. A simple guide to determine the magnification of radiographs and to improve the accuracy of preoperative templating. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2002;84(2):269-272.
10. Elisevich K, Cunningham IA, Assis L. Size estimation and magnification error in radiographic imaging: implications for classification of arteriovenous malformations. Am J Neuroradiol. 1995;16(3):531-538.
11. Stevens PM, Radiographic distortion of bones: a marker study. Orthopedics. 1989;12(11):1457-1463.
12. Spence KF Jr, Decker S, Sell KW. Bursting atlantal fracture associated with rupture of the transverse ligament. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1970;52(3):543-549.
13. Tins BJ, Cassar-Pullicino VN. Imaging of acute cervical spine injuries: review and outlook. Clin Radiol. 2004;59:865-880.
14. Sheridan R, Peralta R, Rhea J, et al. Reformatted visceral protocol helical computed tomographic scanning allows conventional radiographs of the thoracic and lumbar spine to be eliminated in the evaluation of blunt trauma patients. J Trauma. 2003;55:665-669.