Purpose: This single-phantom CT-referenced technical-validation study evaluated residual length and angular measurement bias after source-to-image distance/source-to-object distance (SID/SOD) calibration in full-length lower-limb radiography using system/protocol configurations representing rotational stitching and slot-scanning. Methods: A whole-body anthropomorphic phantom was imaged once with each of six system/protocol configurations: four rotational-stitching configurations and two slot-scanning protocols. CT-derived coronal-plane measurements from three-dimensional landmark localization served as the reference standard. Three attending radiologists performed measurements across three sessions. SID/SOD-calibrated femoral, tibial, and full-length mechanical-axis lengths; mechanical lateral distal femoral angle (mLDFA); medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA); hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA); joint line convergence angle (JLCA); and SID/SOD-calibrated 10.00 mm steel bead diameter were analyzed. Results: Slot-scanning protocols showed small negative full-length biases (Eagle Eye HQ, −5.34[Formula: see text]mm; Eagle Eye HS, −5.14[Formula: see text]mm), whereas rotational-stitching configurations showed positive full-length biases ranging from 28.66[Formula: see text]mm to 57.19[Formula: see text]mm. Angular bias behaved differently: mean mLDFA bias ranged from −0.33[Formula: see text] to 0.85[Formula: see text], MPTA from 1.57[Formula: see text] to 2.21[Formula: see text], HKA from −0.31[Formula: see text] to 0.42[Formula: see text], and JLCA from −2.08[Formula: see text] to −1.37[Formula: see text]. Mean SID/SOD-calibrated steel bead diameter bias ranged from 0.14[Formula: see text]mm to 0.88 mm; bead enlargement was smaller in the tested slot-scanning protocols, although their full-length skeletal bias was slightly negative. Conclusions: In this single-phantom technical validation, SID/SOD calibration left system/protocol-specific residual length bias. Length measurements require local verification before cross-system comparison. Angular measurements showed parameter-specific behavior and require separate validation from linear length measurements. Steel bead diameter measurements may serve as a practical quality-assurance indicator of local linear scale behavior, but they do not replace anatomical phantom validation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bai et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: