Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 29, 2025

Sit-to-stand-and-walk from 120% Knee Height: A Novel Approach to Assess Dynamic Postural Control Independent of Lead-limb
Published on: August 30, 2016
Multicentric development and validation of a multi-scale and multi-task deep learning model for comprehensive lower
Nikolas J Wilhelm1, Claudio E von Schacky2, Felix J Lindner3
1Department of Orthopedics and Sports Orthopedics, Klinikum rechts der Isar, School of Medicine, Munich, Germany; Munich Institute of Robotics and Machine Intelligence, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Abstract:
Osteoarthritis of the knee, a widespread cause of knee disability, is commonly treated in orthopedics due to its rising prevalence. Lower extremity misalignment, pivotal in knee injury etiology and management, necessitates comprehensive mechanical alignment evaluation via frequently-requested weight-bearing long leg radiographs (LLR). Despite LLR's routine use, current analysis techniques are error-prone and time-consuming. To address this, we conducted a multicentric study to develop and validate a deep learning (DL) model for fully automated leg alignment assessment on anterior-posterior LLR, targeting enhanced reliability and efficiency. The DL model, developed using 594 patients' LLR and a 60%/10%/30% data split for training, validation, and testing, executed alignment analyses via a multi-step process, employing a detection network and nine specialized networks. It was designed to assess all vital anatomical and mechanical parameters for standard clinical leg deformity analysis and preoperative planning. Accuracy, reliability, and assessment duration were compared with three specialized orthopedic surgeons across two distinct institutional datasets (136 and 143 radiographs). The algorithm exhibited equivalent performance to the surgeons in terms of alignment accuracy (DL: 0.21 ± 0.18°to 1.06 ± 1.3°vs. OS: 0.21 ± 0.16°to 1.72 ± 1.96°), interrater reliability (ICC DL: 0.90 ± 0.05 to 1.0 ± 0.0 vs. ICC OS: 0.90 ± 0.03 to 1.0 ± 0.0), and clinically acceptable accuracy (DL: 53.9%-100% vs OS 30.8%-100%). Further, automated analysis significantly reduced analysis time compared to manual annotation (DL: 22 ± 0.6 s vs. OS; 101.7 ± 7 s, p ≤ 0.01). By demonstrating that our algorithm not only matches the precision of expert surgeons but also significantly outpaces them in both speed and consistency of measurements, our research underscores a pivotal advancement in harnessing AI to enhance clinical efficiency and decision-making in orthopaedics.

