Literature DB >> 30901757

Machine learning for automated 3-dimensional segmentation of the spine and suggested placement of pedicle screws based on intraoperative cone-beam computer tomography.

Gustav Burström1,2, Christian Buerger3, Jurgen Hoppenbrouwers4, Rami Nachabe4, Cristian Lorenz3, Drazenko Babic4, Robert Homan4, John M Racadio5, Michael Grass3, Oscar Persson1,2, Erik Edström1,2, Adrian Elmi Terander1,2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to develop and validate a system for automatic segmentation of the spine, pedicle identification, and screw path suggestion for use with an intraoperative 3D surgical navigation system.
METHODS: Cone-beam CT (CBCT) images of the spines of 21 cadavers were obtained. An automated model-based approach was used for segmentation. Using machine learning methodology, the algorithm was trained and validated on the image data sets. For measuring accuracy, surface area errors of the automatic segmentation were compared to the manually outlined reference surface on CBCT. To further test both technical and clinical accuracy, the algorithm was applied to a set of 20 clinical cases. The authors evaluated the system's accuracy in pedicle identification by measuring the distance between the user-defined midpoint of each pedicle and the automatically segmented midpoint. Finally, 2 independent surgeons performed a qualitative evaluation of the segmentation to judge whether it was adequate to guide surgical navigation and whether it would have resulted in a clinically acceptable pedicle screw placement.
RESULTS: The clinically relevant pedicle identification and automatic pedicle screw planning accuracy was 86.1%. By excluding patients with severe spinal deformities (i.e., Cobb angle > 75° and severe spinal degeneration) and previous surgeries, a success rate of 95.4% was achieved. The mean time (± SD) for automatic segmentation and screw planning in 5 vertebrae was 11 ± 4 seconds.
CONCLUSIONS: The technology investigated has the potential to aid surgeons in navigational planning and improve surgical navigation workflow while maintaining patient safety.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CBCT = cone-beam CT; CT-based navigation; IQR = interquartile range; MaxDist = maximum distance; OR = operating room; RMSDist = root-mean-squared distance; accuracy; machine learning; navigation system; pedicle screw; segmentation; surgical technique

Year:  2019        PMID: 30901757     DOI: 10.3171/2018.12.SPINE181397

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine        ISSN: 1547-5646


  16 in total

1.  Diffuse reflectance spectroscopy accurately identifies the pre-cortical zone to avoid impending pedicle screw breach in spinal fixation surgery.

Authors:  Gustav Burström; Akash Swamy; Jarich W Spliethoff; Christian Reich; Drazenko Babic; Benno H W Hendriks; Halldor Skulason; Oscar Persson; Adrian Elmi Terander; Erik Edström
Journal:  Biomed Opt Express       Date:  2019-10-24       Impact factor: 3.732

2.  Artificial Intelligence in Adult Spinal Deformity.

Authors:  Pramod N Kamalapathy; Aditya V Karhade; Daniel Tobert; Joseph H Schwab
Journal:  Acta Neurochir Suppl       Date:  2022

3.  Deep Q-Learning in Robotics: Improvement of Accuracy and Repeatability.

Authors:  Marius Sumanas; Algirdas Petronis; Vytautas Bucinskas; Andrius Dzedzickis; Darius Virzonis; Inga Morkvenaite-Vilkonciene
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-21       Impact factor: 3.847

Review 4.  Artificial intelligence in spine care: current applications and future utility.

Authors:  Alexander L Hornung; Christopher M Hornung; G Michael Mallow; J Nicolás Barajas; Augustus Rush; Arash J Sayari; Fabio Galbusera; Hans-Joachim Wilke; Matthew Colman; Frank M Phillips; Howard S An; Dino Samartzis
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2022-03-27       Impact factor: 2.721

5.  Autonomous image segmentation and identification of anatomical landmarks from lumbar spine intraoperative computed tomography scans using machine learning: A validation study.

Authors:  Krzyzstof Siemionow; Cristian Luciano; Craig Forsthoefel; Suavi Aydogmus
Journal:  J Craniovertebr Junction Spine       Date:  2020-06-05

6.  Towards Optical Imaging for Spine Tracking without Markers in Navigated Spine Surgery.

Authors:  Francesca Manni; Adrian Elmi-Terander; Gustav Burström; Oscar Persson; Erik Edström; Ronald Holthuizen; Caifeng Shan; Svitlana Zinger; Fons van der Sommen; Peter H N de With
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-06-29       Impact factor: 3.576

Review 7.  Machine learning applications in prostate cancer magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Renato Cuocolo; Maria Brunella Cipullo; Arnaldo Stanzione; Lorenzo Ugga; Valeria Romeo; Leonardo Radice; Arturo Brunetti; Massimo Imbriaco
Journal:  Eur Radiol Exp       Date:  2019-08-07

Review 8.  Imaging in Spine Surgery: Current Concepts and Future Directions.

Authors:  Garrett K Harada; Zakariah K Siyaji; Sadaf Younis; Philip K Louie; Dino Samartzis; Howard S An
Journal:  Spine Surg Relat Res       Date:  2019-11-01

9.  Intraoperative Computed Tomography-Based Navigation with Augmented Reality for Lateral Approaches to the Spine.

Authors:  Mirza Pojskić; Miriam Bopp; Benjamin Saß; Andreas Kirschbaum; Christopher Nimsky; Barbara Carl
Journal:  Brain Sci       Date:  2021-05-15

10.  Applications of Machine Learning Using Electronic Medical Records in Spine Surgery.

Authors:  John T Schwartz; Michael Gao; Eric A Geng; Kush S Mody; Christopher M Mikhail; Samuel K Cho
Journal:  Neurospine       Date:  2019-12-31
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.