• Camille Parret, Fanchon Herman, Catherine Cyteval, and Maxime Pastor.
• Osteoarticular Medical Imaging Section, Department of Medical Imaging, Montpellier University Hospital, Montpellier, France.
• Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2024 Aug 1; 144 (8): 384138493841-3849.

ObjectivesTo compare the image quality and X-ray exposure dose from EOSedge versus standard digital radiography (SDR) focused on the hip for replacement or prosthesis revision surgery.Materials & MethodsThis prospective single centre study included 97 patients between November 2022 and April 2023. For preoperative assessment, SDR radiographs from frontal pelvic and hip profile were indispensable. Often, surgeon requested spine radiograph from EOSedge, to which we added frontal pelvic and hip profile. A radiologist with 4 years' experience established a score based on European guidelines to evaluate the EOSedge versus SDR image quality. Quality scores (QS) were compared using paired Student's t test. The entrance skin dose (ESD) and dose area product (DAP) of the images were recorded.ResultsA total of 97 patients, including 49 women and 48 men (mean 68.10 years ± 13.28) were assessed. The QSEOSedge was significantly higher than the QSSDR, with differences of 1.34 ± 1.90 (p < 0.001) and 1.74 ± 1.90 (p < 0.001), respectively. The difference in total QS was 3.08 ± 3.48 (p < 0.001). The radiation delivered (ESD x DAP) by EOSedge was 29 times lower than that delivered by SDR for frontal pelvic imaging (0.35 ± 0.91 versus 10.20 ± 12.63; p < 0.001) and 17 times lower for hip profile imaging (0.41 ± 0.84 versus 6.91 ± 9.70; p < 0.001).ConclusionThis study highlighted the superior image quality of EOSedge images focused on the pelvis and hip compared to SDR, with significantly less radiation exposure.© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

22 keywords...

hide…