Mechanical axis image quality of the EOS imaging system compared to digital radiographs

Abstract Objective To compare mechanical axis image quality between the EOS imaging system and digital radiograph (DR). Materials and methods This retrospective study included 100 patients who underwent both EOS and DR mechanical axis imaging. It was conducted according to the Quality and Standards Department at the University of Sheffield. Three observers independently scored the DR and EOS images according to the modified European guidelines on quality criteria for diagnostic radiographic images in paediatrics: resolution, coverage of the area of interest, positioning, contrast, and motion. The range of scores was (Yes) for the fulfilled criterion and (No) for the not fulfilled criterion. For the motion criterion, the scores were (No) if the image quality criterion was not fulfilled (motion) and (Yes) if the image quality criterion was fulfilled (no motion). Inter-rater agreement was measured using the Gwet’s agreement coefficient (AC1) with a 95% confidence interval. The accuracy of the EOS was assessed using sensitivity, specificity, and the area under curve (AUC). Variables between the EOS and DR were compared using McNemar’s test. Both Gwet’s AC1 and corresponding 95%CI were computed using irrCAC library in R4.41 software. Results The mean (range) age of patients when they underwent DR and EOS imaging was 11.2 (4–18) and 11.8 (5–17) years, respectively. EOS demonstrated almost perfect inter-rater reliability in the resolution criterion (AC1 = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.98,1.00, p < 0.001), while DR showed similar reliability in the motion artefacts (AC1 = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.92.00, p < 0.001). Intra-rater reliability was high for most criteria. EOS images demonstrated high sensitivity for all criteria and variable specificity, which equalled or exceeded that of DR images. Significant differences were found in some criteria, such as the coverage of the area of interest (chi-squared = 37.39, p < 0.001) and hip level (chi-squared statistic = 31.44, p < 0.001). Conclusion The high AC1, sensitivity, and AUCs highlight the diagnostic image quality of the EOS imaging system for mechanical axis images, making it a valuable modality in clinical settings. Therefore, the EOS imaging system can be used instead of DR in this context, offering advantages such as lower irradiation, shorter scanning time, and the capability for 3D reconstruction.