Metatarsophalangeal and interphalangeal joint angle measurements on weight-bearing CT images.

BACKGROUND:The aim of this study was to present and evaluate methods of measuring toe joint angels using joint-surface based and inertial axes approaches. METHODS:Nine scans of one frozen human cadaveric foot were obtained using weight-bearing CT. Two observers independently segmented bones in the forefoot and measured metatarsalphalangeal joint (MTPJ) angles, proximal and distal interphalangeal joint (PIPJ and DIPJ) angles and interphalangeal angles of the hallux (IPJ) using 1) inertial axes, representing the long anatomical axes, of the bones and 2) axes determined using centroids of articular joint surfaces. RESULTS:The standard deviations (SD) of the IPJ/PIPJ and DIPJ angles were lower using joint-surface based axes (between 1.5˚ and 4.1˚) than when the inertial axes method was used (between 3.3˚ and 16.4˚), for MTPJ the SD's were similar for both methods (between 0.5˚ and 2.6˚). For the IPJ/PIPJ and DIPJ angles, the width of the 95% CI and the range were also lower using the joint-surface axes method (95% CI: 2.0˚-4.1˚ vs 3.2˚-16.3˚; range: 3.1˚-7.4˚ vs 3.8˚-35.8˚). Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) representing inter- and intra-rater reliability were good to excellent regarding the MTPJ and IPJ/PIPJ angles in both techniques (between 0.85 and 0.99). For DIPJ angles, ICC's were good for the inertial axes method (0.78 and 0.79) and moderate for the joint-surface axes method (0.60 and 0.70). CONCLUSION:The joint-surface axes method enables reliable and reproducible measurements of MTPJ, IPJ/PIPJ and DIPJ angles. For PIPJ and DIPJ angles this method is preferable over the use of inertial axes.