Claudio Vergari1, Isabelle Courtois2, Eric Ebermeyer2, Houssam Bouloussa3, Raphaël Vialle3, Wafa Skalli4. 1. Arts et Metiers ParisTech, LBM/Institut de Biomecanique Humaine Georges Charpak, 151 bd de l'Hopital, 75013, Paris, France. c.vergari@gmail.com. 2. Unite Rachis, CHU-Hopital Bellevue, 25 Boulevard Pasteur, 42100, Saint-Etienne, France. 3. Department of Paediatric Orthopaedics, Armand Trousseau Hospital, Université Pierre et Marie Curie-Paris 6, 75571, Paris, France. 4. Arts et Metiers ParisTech, LBM/Institut de Biomecanique Humaine Georges Charpak, 151 bd de l'Hopital, 75013, Paris, France.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Personalized modeling of brace action has potential in improving brace efficacy in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). Model validation and simulation uncertainty are rarely addressed, limiting the clinical implementation of personalized models. We hypothesized that a thorough validation of a personalized finite element model (FEM) of brace action would highlight potential means of improving the model. METHODS: Forty-two AIS patients were included retrospectively and prospectively. Personalized FEMs of pelvis, spine and ribcage were built from stereoradiographies. Brace action was simulated through soft cylindrical pads acting on the ribcage and through displacements applied to key vertebrae. Simulation root mean squared errors (RMSEs) were calculated by comparison with the actual brace action (quantified through clinical indices, vertebral positions and orientations) observed in in-brace stereoradiographies. RESULTS: Simulation RMSEs of Cobb angle and vertebral apical axial rotation was lower than measurement uncertainty in 79 % of the patients. Pooling all patients and clinical indices, 87 % of the indices had lower RMSEs than the measurement uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS: In-depth analysis suggests that personalization of spinal functional units mechanical properties could improve the simulation's accuracy, but the model gave good results, thus justifying further research on its clinical application.
PURPOSE: Personalized modeling of brace action has potential in improving brace efficacy in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). Model validation and simulation uncertainty are rarely addressed, limiting the clinical implementation of personalized models. We hypothesized that a thorough validation of a personalized finite element model (FEM) of brace action would highlight potential means of improving the model. METHODS: Forty-two AISpatients were included retrospectively and prospectively. Personalized FEMs of pelvis, spine and ribcage were built from stereoradiographies. Brace action was simulated through soft cylindrical pads acting on the ribcage and through displacements applied to key vertebrae. Simulation root mean squared errors (RMSEs) were calculated by comparison with the actual brace action (quantified through clinical indices, vertebral positions and orientations) observed in in-brace stereoradiographies. RESULTS: Simulation RMSEs of Cobb angle and vertebral apical axial rotation was lower than measurement uncertainty in 79 % of the patients. Pooling all patients and clinical indices, 87 % of the indices had lower RMSEs than the measurement uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS: In-depth analysis suggests that personalization of spinal functional units mechanical properties could improve the simulation's accuracy, but the model gave good results, thus justifying further research on its clinical application.
Entities:
Keywords:
Brace; Finite element model; Pediatrics; Spine deformity
Authors: D Mitton; S Deschênes; S Laporte; B Godbout; S Bertrand; J A de Guise; W Skalli Journal: Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 1.763
Authors: David Malfair; Anne K Flemming; Marcel F Dvorak; Peter L Munk; Alexandra T Vertinsky; Manraj K Heran; Doug A Graeb Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Frank J Schwab; Virginie Lafage; Jean-Pierre Farcy; Keith H Bridwell; Stephen Glassman; Michael R Shainline Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2008-09-15 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Wojciech Pepke; Aly El Zeneiny; Haidara Almansour; Thomas Bruckner; Stefan Hemmer; Michael Akbar Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2021-04-23 Impact factor: 4.241
Authors: Tanja Lerchl; Malek El Husseini; Amirhossein Bayat; Anjany Sekuboyina; Luis Hermann; Kati Nispel; Thomas Baum; Maximilian T Löffler; Veit Senner; Jan S Kirschke Journal: Front Bioeng Biotechnol Date: 2022-07-11
Authors: Christos Koutras; Hamed Shayestehpour; Jesús Pérez; Christian Wong; John Rasmussen; Maxime Tournier; Matthieu Nesme; Miguel A Otaduy Journal: Front Bioeng Biotechnol Date: 2022-07-19