Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2026-2
Tibiofemoral joint space width in semiflexed standing position: no difference by weightbearing on one or two knees by manual and computerized measurements
Single knee weightbearing (SKW) radiographs are considered more accurate for detecting minimal joint space width (mJSW) than double knee weightbearing (DKW) but have not been compared using a standardized method.
Purpose
To compare medial and lateral tibiofemoral mJSW between SKW and DKW radiographs using manual and computerized measurements.
Material and Methods
Standardized posteroanterior radiographs of both knees were obtained from 98 patients with knee pain (55 women; mean age = 64.5 years; age range = 41–81 years) using the DKW technique in semiflexion, followed by SKW. Medial and lateral mJSW, coronal translation, and tibial plateau alignment (intermargin distance) were measured manually. Intra- and inter-rater agreement was assessed using 100 knee radiographs. In addition, mJSW was measured using a fully automated computerized technique. Manual measurements were adjusted for magnification, while computerized measurements were not.
Results
Inter- and intra-rater reliability of manual measurements was excellent. Both manual and computerized mJSW measurements showed a non-significant trend toward larger medial mJSW with DKW compared to SKW. Coronal translation did not differ between SKW and DKW. The intermargin distances were small, with no significant differences between SKW and DKW, indicating reproducible knee positioning. Computerized measurements consistently showed larger mJSW than manual measurements.
Conclusion
Medial and lateral mJSW did not differ significantly between SKW and DKW techniques using either manual or computerized measurements. However, a systematic difference was observed between manual and computerized mJSW measurements. The SKW technique did not offer any advantages over the DKW technique for assessing knee osteoarthritis.
HochbergMCAltmanRDBrandtKD, et al.Design and conduct of clinical trials in osteoarthritis: preliminary recommendations from a task force of the osteoarthritis research society. J Rheumatol1997;24:792–794.
2.
OrnettiPBrandtKLe GraverandMP, et al.OARSI-OMERACT definition of relevant radiological progression in hip/knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil2009;17:856–863.
3.
AhlbackS. Osteoarthrosis of the knee. A radiographic investigation. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh)1968;39:7–72.
4.
LeachREGreggTSiberFJ. Weight-bearing radiography in osteoarthritis of the knee. Radiology1970;97:265–268.
5.
ThomasRHResnickDAlazrakiNP, et al.Compartmental evaluation of osteoarthritis of the knee. A comparative study of available diagnostic modalities. Radiology1975;116:585–594.
6.
PipernoMLe GraverandMPConrozierT, et al.Quantitative evaluation of joint space width in femorotibial osteoarthritis: comparison of three radiographic views. Osteoarthr Cartil1998;6:252–259.
7.
RosenbergTDPaulosLEParkerRD, et al.The forty-five-degree posteroanterior flexion weight-bearing radiograph of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg1988;70:1479–1483.
8.
Buckland-WrightJCWolfeFWardRJ, et al.Substantial superiority of semiflexed (MTP) views in knee osteoarthritis: a comparative radiographic study, without fluoroscopy, of standing extended, semiflexed (MTP), and schuss views. J Rheumatol1999;26:2664–2674.
9.
KothariMGuermaziAvon IngerslebenG, et al.Fixed-flexion radiography of the knee provides reproducible joint space width measurements in osteoarthritis. Eur Radiol2004;14:1568–1573.
10.
YamanakaNTakahashiTIchikawaN, et al.Posterior-anterior weight-bearing radiograph in 15 degree knee flexion in medial osteoarthritis. Skeletal Radiol2003;32:28–34.
11.
MarklundTMyrnertsR. Radiographic determination of cartilage height in the knee joint. Acta Orthop Scand1974;45:752–755.
12.
Buckland-WrightJCMacfarlaneDGWilliamsSA, et al.Accuracy and precision of joint space width measurements in standard and macroradiographs of osteoarthritic knees. Ann Rheum Dis1995;54:872–880.
13.
VignonEPipernoMLe GraverandMP, et al.Measurement of radiographic joint space width in the tibiofemoral compartment of the osteoarthritic knee: comparison of standing anteroposterior and Lyon schuss views. Arthritis Rheum2003;48:378–384.
14.
MazzucaSABrandtKDDieppePA, et al.Effect of alignment of the medial tibial plateau and x-ray beam on apparent progression of osteoarthritis in the standing anteroposterior knee radiograph. Arthritis Rheum2001;44:1786–1794.
15.
Botha-ScheepersSKloppenburgMKroonHM, et al.Fixed-flexion knee radiography: the sensitivity to detect knee joint space narrowing in osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil2007;15:350–353.
16.
ConrozierTMathieuPPipernoM, et al.Selection of knee radiographs for trials of structure-modifying drugs in patients with knee osteoarthritis: a prospective, longitudinal study of Lyon Schuss knee radiographs with the definition of adequate alignment of the medial tibial plateau. Arthritis Rheum2005;52:1411–1417.
17.
VignonEBrandtKDMercierC, et al.Alignment of the medial tibial plateau affects the rate of joint space narrowing in the osteoarthritic knee. Osteoarthr Cartil2010;18:1436–1440.
18.
MercierCPipernoMVignonE, et al.In normal knees, joint space width (JSW) is correlated with the intermargin distance (IMD), a measure of medial tibial plateau alignment. Variations in IMD explain variability in JSW in serial radiographs. Jt Bone Spine2013;80:183–187.
19.
KhamaisySZuiderbaanHATheinR, et al.Coronal tibiofemoral subluxation in knee osteoarthritis. Skeletal Radiol2016;45:57–61.
20.
OgawaHMatsumotoKAkiyamaH. Coronal tibiofemoral subluxation is correlated to correction angle in medial opening wedge high tibial osteotomy. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc2018;26:3482–3490.
21.
BoegaardTRudlingOPeterssonIF, et al.Joint-space width in the weight-bearing radiogram of the tibiofemoral joint. Should the patient stand on one leg or two?Acta Radiol1998;39:32–35.
22.
YazdanpanahOMobarakehKMNakhaeiM, et al.Comparison of double and single leg weight-bearing radiography in determining knee alignment. Arch Bone Jt Surg2017;5:174–180.
23.
SpecognaAVBirminghamTBHuntMA, et al.Radiographic measures of knee alignment in patients with varus gonarthrosis: effect of weightbearing status and associations with dynamic joint load. Am J Sports Med2007;35:65–70.
24.
SkouNEgundN. Patellar position in weight-bearing radiographs compared with non-weight-bearing: significance for the detection of osteoarthritis. Acta Radiol2017;58:331–337.
25.
MooreTMHarveyJPJr. Roentgenographic measurement of tibial-plateau depression due to fracture. J Bone Joint Surgery Am1974;56:155–160.
26.
EgundNRydL. Patellar and quadriceps mechanism. In: DaviesAMCassar-PullicinoV (eds) Imaging of the Knee, Techniques and Applications. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2002, pp.217–248.
27.
SegalNAFrickEDuryeaJ, et al.Comparison of tibiofemoral joint space width measurements from standing CT and fixed flexion radiography. J Orthop Res2017;35:1388–1395.
28.
BrejnebølMWHansenPNybingJU, et al.External validation of an artificial intelligence tool for radiographic knee osteoarthritis severity classification. Eur J Radiol2022;150:110249.
29.
EngJ. Sample size estimation: how many individuals should be studied?Radiology2003;227:309–313.
30.
ShroutPEFleissJL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull1979;86:420–428.
31.
BlandJMAltmanDG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet1986;1:307–310.
32.
OksendahlHLGomezNThomasCS, et al.Digital radiographic assessment of tibiofemoral joint space width A variance component analysis. J Knee Surg2009;22:205–212.
33.
DeanRSDePhillipoNNChahlaJ, et al.Posterior tibial slope measurements using the anatomic axis are significantly increased compared with those that use the mechanical axis. Arthroscopy2021;37:243–249.
34.
MeierMJanssenDKoeckFX, et al.Variations in medial and lateral slope and medial proximal tibial angle. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc2021;29:939–946.
35.
NunleyRMNamDJohnsonSR, et al.Extreme variability in posterior slope of the proximal tibia: measurements on 2395 CT scans of patients undergoing UKA?J Arthroplasty2014;29:1677–1680.
36.
HashemiJChandrashekarNGillB, et al.The geometry of the tibial plateau and its influence on the biomechanics of the tibiofemoral joint. J Bone Jt Surg2008;90:2724–2734.
37.
MazzucaSABrandtKDBuckwalterKA, et al.Field test of the reproducibility of the semiflexed metatarsophalangeal view in repeated radiographic examinations of subjects with osteoarthritis of the knee. Arthritis Rheum2002;46:109–113.
38.
NevittMCPeterfyCGuermaziA, et al.Longitudinal performance evaluation and validation of fixed-flexion radiography of the knee for detection of joint space loss. Arthritis Rheum2007;56:1512–1520.
39.
Le GraverandMPVignonEPBrandtKD, et al.Head-to-head comparison of the Lyon schuss and fixed flexion radiographic techniques. Long-term reproducibility in normal knees and sensitivity to change in osteoarthritic knees. Ann Rheum Dis2008;67:1562–1566.
40.
MazzucaSALe GraverandMPVignonE, et al.Performance of a non-fluoroscopically assisted substitute for the Lyon schuss knee radiograph: quality and reproducibility of positioning and sensitivity to joint space narrowing in osteoarthritic knees. Osteoarthr Cartil2008;16:1555–1559.
41.
ChangCBKohIJSeoES, et al.The radiographic predictors of symptom severity in advanced knee osteoarthritis with varus deformity. Knee2011;18:456–460.
42.
OdenbringSTjörnstrandBEgundN, et al.Function after tibial osteotomy for medial gonarthrosis below aged 50 years. Acta Orthop Scand1989;60:527–531.
43.
DuryeaJLiJPeterfyCG, et al.Trainable rule-based algorithm for the measurement of joint space width in digital radiographic images of the knee. Med Phys2000;27:580–591.
44.
MehtaNDuryeaJBadgerGJ, et al.Comparison of 2 radiographic techniques for measurement of tibiofemoral joint space width. Orthop J Sport Med2017;5:2325967117728675.
45.
KellgrenJHLawrenceJC. Radiological assessment of osteo-arthrosis. Ann Rheum Dis1957;16:494–502.
46.
BeattieKADuryeaJPuiM, et al.Minimum joint space width and tibial cartilage morphology in the knees of healthy individuals: a cross-sectional study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord2008;9:119.
47.
LaxafossEJacobsenSGosvigKK, et al.Case definitions of knee osteoarthritis in 4,151 unselected subjects: relevance for epidemiological studies: the Copenhagen osteoarthritis study. Skeletal Radiol2010;39:859–866.
48.
OkaHMurakiSAkuneT, et al.Normal and threshold values of radiographic parameters for knee osteoarthritis using a computer-assisted measuring system (KOACAD): the ROAD study. J Orthop Sci2010;15:781–789.
49.
Le GraverandMPMazzucaSLassereM, et al.Assessment of the radioanatomic positioning of the osteoarthritic knee in serial radiographs: comparison of three acquisition techniques. Osteoarthr Cartil2006;14(Suppl A):A37–A43.
50.
GuermaziANiuJHayashiD, et al.Prevalence of abnormalities in knees detected by MRI in adults without knee osteoarthritis: population based observational study (Framingham osteoarthritis study). BMJ2012;345:e5339.
