title: The accuracy and validity of "routine" X-rays in estimating lumbar disc arthroplasty placement.
abstract: METHODS
  Original study.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To compare the accuracy of radiograph (XR) estimates of lumbar total disc arthroplasty placement with high-resolution computed tomography (CT).
  
  
  BACKGROUND
  Most lumbar disc arthroplasties are inserted and subsequently analyzed using anteroposterior and lateral XR: XR estimates are often correlated with clinical outcomes. No study has hitherto assessed the relative accuracy of XR estimates with CT.
  
  
  METHODS
  Patients (N = 36) had recently undergone uncomplicated lumbar total disc arthroplasty for unresponsive discogenic back pain. Interpedicular midline malplacement and vertebral body penetration (VBP) were estimated after surgery, by "blinded" independent review, using computer software on both nonrotated XR and high-resolution CT at the same clinic attendance.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Results were obtained in N = 36 patients. No significant differences were found between XR and CT in the mean +/- standard error estimation of either midline malplacement (1.7 +/- 0.2 mm vs. 1.8 +/- 0.2 mm, P = 0.86) or VBP (1.5 +/- 0.3 mm vs. 1.6 +/- 0.3 mm, P = 0.79). However, the correlation between XR and CT for midline malplacement appeared strong (r = 0.72, P < 0.001), whereas the correlation between XR and CT for VBP was poor (r = 0.23 P > 0.10). The standard deviation of XR-CT differences for VBP (2.2 mm) was almost twice that for midline malplacement (1.2 mm). XR-CT differences exceeded the 95% limit of agreement in 6% of midline placement estimates, and in 8% for VBP.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Nonrotated XR permitted an accurate and valid estimate of midline malplacement relative to CT in most cases. However, the correlation was biased toward XR underestimation of CT-derived malplacement, and highly significant XR-CT differences occurred in 6% of estimates: early postoperative CT is therefore recommended to enhance the estimation of midline placement. XR-CT agreement for VBP was poor: CT is therefore indicated in all cases for this parameter. This is the first study to compare the accuracy of XR in estimating lumbar total disc arthroplasty placement with CT.
authors.affiliation: Department of Spinal Surgery, University Hospital of North Tees, Hardwick, Stockton, North Tees. l.a.g.marshman@btinternet.com
authors.forename: Laurence A G
authors.initials: LA
authors.lastname: Marshman
authors.forename: Matthew
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Trewhella
authors.forename: Tai
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Friesem
authors.forename: Y Raja
authors.initials: YR
authors.lastname: Rampersaud
authors.forename: Jean-Charles
authors.initials: JC
authors.lastname: Le Huec
authors.forename: Manoj
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Krishna
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D019643:Arthroplasty, Replacement; D003955:Diagnostic Tests, Routine; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007403:Intervertebral Disc / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D008159:Lumbar Vertebrae / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011300:Preoperative Care; D011446:Prospective Studies; D016037:Single-Blind Method; D013122:Spinal Diseases / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D036542:Tomography, Spiral Computed