TY - JOUR
T1 - Deep Learning for Radiographic Measurement of Femoral Component Subsidence Following Total Hip Arthroplasty
AU - Rouzrokh, Pouria
AU - Wyles, Cody C.
AU - Kurian, Shyam J.
AU - Ramazanian, Taghi
AU - Cai, Jason C.
AU - Huang, Qiao
AU - Zhang, Kuan
AU - Taunton, Michael J.
AU - Kremers, Hilal Maradit
AU - Erickson, Bradley J.
N1 - Funding Information:
* P.R. and C.C.W. contributed equally to this work. Supported by the Mayo Foundation Presidential Fund and the National Institutes of Health (grants R01AR73147 and P30AR76312). Conflicts of interest are listed at the end of this article.
Funding Information:
Author contributions: Guarantors of integrity of entire study, P.R., C.C.W., H.M.K., B.J.E.; study concepts/study design or data acquisition or data analysis/interpretation, all authors; manuscript drafting or manuscript revision for important intellectual content, all authors; approval of final version of submitted manuscript, all authors; agrees to ensure any questions related to the work are appropriately resolved, all authors; literature research, P.R., C.C.W., S.J.K., T.R., J.C.C., Q.H., K.Z., H.M.K.; clinical studies, C.C.W., T.R., M.J.T., H.M.K.; experimental studies, P.R., J.C.C., K.Z., H.M.K.; statistical analysis, P.R., C.C.W., J.C.C., Q.H., H.M.K.; and manuscript editing, all authors Disclosures of conflicts of interest: P.R. No relevant relationships. C.C.W. No relevant relationships. S.J.K. No relevant relationships. T.R. No relevant relationships. J.C.C. No relevant relationships. Q.H. No relevant relationships. K.Z. No relevant relationships. M.J.T. Royalties/licenses from DJO Surgical; consulting fees from DJO Surgical; leadership role with Journal of Arthroplasty. H.M.K. Mayo Foundation Presidential Fund NIH grants R01AR73147 and P30AR76312. B.J.E. Chair of SIIM Research Committee; consultant to the editor for Radiology: Artificial Intelligence.
Publisher Copyright:
© RSNA, 2022.
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - Femoral component subsidence following total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a worrisome radiographic finding. This study developed and evaluated a deep learning tool to automatically quantify femoral component subsidence between two serial anteroposterior (AP) hip radiographs. The authors’ institutional arthroplasty registry was used to retrospectively identify patients who underwent primary THA from 2000 to 2020. A deep learning dynamic U-Net model was trained to automatically segment femur, implant, and magnification markers on a dataset of 500 randomly selected AP hip radiographs from 386 patients with polished tapered cemented femoral stems. An image processing algorithm was then developed to measure subsidence by automatically annotating reference points on the femur and implant, calibrating that with respect to magnification markers. Algorithm and manual subsidence measurements by two independent orthopedic surgeon reviewers in 135 randomly selected patients were compared. The mean, median, and SD of measurement discrepancy between the automatic and manual measurements were 0.6, 0.3, and 0.7 mm, respectively, and did not demonstrate a systematic tendency between human and machine. Automatic and manual measurements were strongly correlated and showed no evidence of significant differences. In contrast to the manual approach, the deep learning tool needs no user input to perform subsidence measurements.
AB - Femoral component subsidence following total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a worrisome radiographic finding. This study developed and evaluated a deep learning tool to automatically quantify femoral component subsidence between two serial anteroposterior (AP) hip radiographs. The authors’ institutional arthroplasty registry was used to retrospectively identify patients who underwent primary THA from 2000 to 2020. A deep learning dynamic U-Net model was trained to automatically segment femur, implant, and magnification markers on a dataset of 500 randomly selected AP hip radiographs from 386 patients with polished tapered cemented femoral stems. An image processing algorithm was then developed to measure subsidence by automatically annotating reference points on the femur and implant, calibrating that with respect to magnification markers. Algorithm and manual subsidence measurements by two independent orthopedic surgeon reviewers in 135 randomly selected patients were compared. The mean, median, and SD of measurement discrepancy between the automatic and manual measurements were 0.6, 0.3, and 0.7 mm, respectively, and did not demonstrate a systematic tendency between human and machine. Automatic and manual measurements were strongly correlated and showed no evidence of significant differences. In contrast to the manual approach, the deep learning tool needs no user input to perform subsidence measurements.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85131681771&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85131681771&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1148/ryai.210206
DO - 10.1148/ryai.210206
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85131681771
SN - 2638-6100
VL - 4
JO - Radiology: Artificial Intelligence
JF - Radiology: Artificial Intelligence
IS - 3
M1 - e210206
ER -