Rationale and Objectives This study investigates the performance of tomosynthesis in the presence of osteosynthetic implants, aiming to overcome superimposition-induced limitations in conventional radiograms. Materials and Methods After surgical fracture induction and subsequent osteosynthesis, 8 cadaveric fracture models (wrist, metacarpus, ankle, metatarsus) were scanned with the prototypical tomosynthesis mode of a multiuse x-ray system. Tomosynthesis protocols at 60, 80, and 116 kV (sweep angle 10°, 13 FPS) were compared with standard radiograms. Five radiologists independently rated diagnostic assessability based on an equidistant 7-point scale focusing on fracture delineation, intra-articular screw placement, and implant positioning. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated to analyze interrater agreement. Results Radiation dose in radiography was 0.48 ± 0.26 dGy·cm 2 versus 0.12 ± 0.01, 0.36 ± 0.02, and 1.95 ± 0.11 dGy·cm 2 for tomosynthesis scans at 60, 80, and 116 kV. Delineation of fracture lines was superior for 80/116 kV tomosynthesis compared with radiograms ( P ≤ 0.003). Assessability of intra-articular screw placement was deemed favorable for all tomosynthesis protocols ( P ≤ 0.004), whereas superiority for evaluation of implant positioning could not be ascertained (all P 's ≥ 0.599). Diagnostic confidence was higher for 80/116 kV tomosynthesis versus radiograms and 60 kV tomosynthesis ( P ≤ 0.002). Interrater agreement was good for fracture delineation (ICC, 0.803; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.598–0.904), intra-articular screw placement (ICC, 0.802; 95% CI, 0.599–0.903), implant positioning (ICC, 0.855; 95% CI, 0.729–0.926), and diagnostic confidence (ICC, 0.842; 95% CI, 0.556–0.934). Conclusions In the postoperative workup of extremity fractures, tomosynthesis allows for superior assessment of fracture lines and intra-articular screw positioning with greater diagnostic confidence at radiation doses comparable to conventional radiograms.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Grunz et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: