Hip Osteoarthritis, Hip Prosthesis Infection
Conditions
Keywords
EOS, Radiography, Hip, Hip replacement, Image quality
Brief summary
EOSedge is a precise, low dose imaging system that delivers full body, high-quality images covering the full set of musculoskeletal and orthopedic exams. The objective of the study is to evaluate the quality of the focused pelvis/hip X-ray images on EOSedge compared to those performed on DR (current practice) to perform a preoperative radiographic evaluation of hip implant, A sufficient image quality on focused X-ray images performed on EOSedge would allow (1) to avoid the passage on two different radiographic systems (saving time) (2) to reduce the patient's x-ray radiation dose
Interventions
DIAGNOSTIC_TESTEOSedge imaging
Hip X-ray evaluation in an EOSedge imaging for preoperative assessment for hip replacement or revision surgery
Sponsors
University Hospital, Montpellier
Study design
Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
DIAGNOSTIC
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Patient 18 years of age or older * Came to the imaging department to perform a preoperative assessment for hip replacement or revision
Exclusion criteria
* Patient under guardianship or curatorship * Patient participating in an interventional study * Patient unable to read and/or write
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Score of Image quality | Day 0 | Each criteria is quantitative and combined to obtain a final quantitative score : * Perfect reproduction = 2 / Moderate reproduction = 1 / Poor or uninterpretable reproduction = 0 * Artifacts ? = no or absence of periprosthetic material = 1; YES = 0 * X-ray image acceptable ? = Fully acceptable = 2; Acceptable only under limited clinical conditions = 1; Unacceptable (indicate why) = 0; OUTOCOME = FINAL SCORE 1. European C, Directorate-General for R, Innovation, Carmichael J, Moores B, Maccia C. Guide européen relatif aux critères de qualité des clichés de radiodiagnostic: Publications Office, 2000. 2. Kogon PL, Lumsden R. How do you critique your radiographs? The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association. 1993; 37(4):230-232. 3. Cook JV, Kyriou JC, Pettet A, Fitzgerald MC, Shah K, Pablot SM. Key factors in the optimization of paediatric X-ray practice. The British journal of radiology. 2001; 74(887):1032-1040. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Dosimetry | Day 0 | The X-ray exposure dose induced by standard radiography and EOSedge will be compared. The radiation delivered to the patient during standard and EOSedge radiography will be quantified according to the dose × area product (DAP) \[Gy.cm2\] (dose \* area product), for each exposure |
Countries
France
Contacts
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORCatherine c-cyteval@chu-montpellier.fr, MD, PhD
Departement of Medical Imaging - Montpellier University hospital LAPEYRONIE Hospital
Outcome results
None listed