Assessment of Hindfoot Alignment Comparing Weightbearing Radiography to Weightbearing Computed Tomography

  • Christopher B Arena
  • Yantarat Sripanich
  • Richard Leake
  • Charles L Saltzman
  • Alexej Barg


BACKGROUND: Hindfoot alignment view (HAV) radiographs are widely utilized for 2-dimensional (2D) radiographic assessment of hindfoot alignment; however, the development of weightbearing computed tomography (WBCT) may provide more accurate methods of quantifying 3-dimensional (3D) hindfoot alignment. The aim of this study was to compare the 2D calcaneal moment arm measurements on HAV radiographs with WBCT.

METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included 375 consecutive patients with both HAV radiographs and WBCT imaging. Measurement of the 2D hindfoot alignment moment arm was compared between both imaging modalities. The potential confounding influence of valgus/varus/neutral alignment, presence of hardware, and motion artifact were further analyzed.

RESULTS: The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) of interobserver and intraobserver reliability for measurements with both imaging modalities were excellent. Both modalities were highly correlated (Spearman coefficient, 0.930; P < .001). HAV radiographs exhibited a mean calcaneal moment arm difference of 3.9 mm in the varus direction compared with WBCT (95% CI, -4.9 to 12.8). The difference of hindfoot alignment between both modalities was comparable in subgroups with neutral/valgus/varus alignment, presence of hardware, and motion artifact.

CONCLUSION: Both HAV radiographs and WBCT are highly reliable and highly correlated imaging methods for assessing hindfoot alignment. Measurements were not influenced by severe malalignment, the presence of hardware, or motion artifact on WBCT. On average, HAV radiographs overestimated 3.9 mm of varus alignment as compared with WBCT.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Bibliografische Daten

StatusVeröffentlicht - 11.2021
PubMed 34109833