Literature DB >> 31247607

Automatic pedicle screw planning using atlas-based registration of anatomy and reference trajectories.

R Vijayan1, T De Silva, R Han, X Zhang, A Uneri, S Doerr, M Ketcha, A Perdomo-Pantoja, N Theodore, J H Siewerdsen.   

Abstract

An algorithm for automatic spinal pedicle screw planning is reported and evaluated in simulation and first clinical studies. A statistical atlas of the lumbar spine (N  =  40 members) was constructed for active shape model (ASM) registration of target vertebrae to an unsegmented patient CT. The atlas was augmented to include 'reference' trajectories through the pedicles as defined by a spinal neurosurgeon. Following ASM registration, the trajectories are transformed to the patient CT and accumulated to define a patient-specific screw trajectory, diameter, and length. The algorithm was evaluated in leave-one-out analysis (N  =  40 members) and for the first time in a clinical study (N  =  5 patients undergoing cone-beam CT (CBCT) guided spine surgery), and in simulated low-dose CBCT images. ASM registration achieved (2.0  ±  0.5) mm root-mean-square-error (RMSE) in surface registration in 96% of cases, with outliers owing to limitations in CT image quality (high noise/slice thickness). Trajectory centerlines were conformant to the pedicle in 95% of cases. For all non-breaching trajectories, automatically defined screw diameter and length were similarly conformant to the pedicle and vertebral body (98.7%, Grade A/B). The algorithm performed similarly in CBCT clinical studies (93% centerline and screw conformance) and was consistent at the lowest dose levels tested. Average runtime in planning five-level (lumbar) bilateral screws (ten trajectories) was (312.1  ±  104.0) s. The runtime per level for ASM registration was (41.2  ±  39.9) s, and the runtime per trajectory was (4.1  ±  0.8) s, suggesting a runtime of ~(45.3  ±  39.9) s with a more fully parallelized implementation. The algorithm demonstrated accurate, automatic definition of pedicle screw trajectories, diameter, and length in CT images of the spine without segmentation. The studies support translation to clinical studies in free-hand or robot-assisted spine surgery, quality assurance, and data analytics in which fast trajectory definition is a benefit to workflow.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31247607      PMCID: PMC8650759          DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ab2d66

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   4.174


  23 in total

1.  Lumbar pedicle: surgical anatomic evaluation and relationships.

Authors:  A Attar; H C Ugur; A Uz; I Tekdemir; N Egemen; Y Genc
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Point set registration: coherent point drift.

Authors:  Andriy Myronenko; Xubo Song
Journal:  IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 6.226

3.  Accuracy and workflow of navigated spinal instrumentation with the mobile AIRO(®) CT scanner.

Authors:  Nils Hecht; Marije Kamphuis; Marcus Czabanka; Bernd Hamm; Susanne König; Johannes Woitzik; Michael Synowitz; Peter Vajkoczy
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-02-22       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 4.  Current applications of robotics in spine surgery: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Jacob R Joseph; Brandon W Smith; Xilin Liu; Paul Park
Journal:  Neurosurg Focus       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 4.047

Review 5.  Techniques and accuracy of thoracolumbar pedicle screw placement.

Authors:  Varun Puvanesarajah; Jason A Liauw; Sheng-Fu Lo; Ioan A Lina; Timothy F Witham
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2014-04-18

6.  Hounsfield units for assessing bone mineral density and strength: a tool for osteoporosis management.

Authors:  Joseph J Schreiber; Paul A Anderson; Humberto G Rosas; Avery L Buchholz; Anthony G Au
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2011-06-01       Impact factor: 5.284

7.  A new 2.5D representation for lymph node detection using random sets of deep convolutional neural network observations.

Authors:  Holger R Roth; Le Lu; Ari Seff; Kevin M Cherry; Joanne Hoffman; Shijun Wang; Jiamin Liu; Evrim Turkbey; Ronald M Summers
Journal:  Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv       Date:  2014

8.  Spinal fixation. Part 3. Complications of spinal instrumentation.

Authors:  R M Slone; M MacMillan; W J Montgomery
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  1993-07       Impact factor: 5.333

9.  Lumbosacral pedicle screw placement using a fluoroscopic pedicle axis view and a cannulated tapping device.

Authors:  Toshitaka Yoshii; Takashi Hirai; Tsuyoshi Yamada; Satoshi Sumiya; Renpei Mastumoto; Tsuyoshi Kato; Mitsuhiro Enomoto; Hiroyuki Inose; Shigenori Kawabata; Kenichi Shinomiya; Atsushi Okawa
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2015-05-28       Impact factor: 2.359

10.  Lumbar pedicle screw placement: Using only AP plane imaging.

Authors:  Anil Sethi; Adrienne Lee; Rahul Vaidya
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 1.251

View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  New spinal robotic technologies.

Authors:  Bowen Jiang; Tej D Azad; Ethan Cottrill; Corinna C Zygourakis; Alex M Zhu; Neil Crawford; Nicholas Theodore
Journal:  Front Med       Date:  2019-10-31       Impact factor: 4.592

2.  CBCT-based synthetic CT generation using generative adversarial networks with disentangled representation.

Authors:  Jiwei Liu; Hui Yan; Hanlin Cheng; Jianfei Liu; Pengjian Sun; Boyi Wang; Ronghu Mao; Chi Du; Shengquan Luo
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2021-12

Review 3.  Surgical data science - from concepts toward clinical translation.

Authors:  Lena Maier-Hein; Matthias Eisenmann; Duygu Sarikaya; Keno März; Toby Collins; Anand Malpani; Johannes Fallert; Hubertus Feussner; Stamatia Giannarou; Pietro Mascagni; Hirenkumar Nakawala; Adrian Park; Carla Pugh; Danail Stoyanov; Swaroop S Vedula; Kevin Cleary; Gabor Fichtinger; Germain Forestier; Bernard Gibaud; Teodor Grantcharov; Makoto Hashizume; Doreen Heckmann-Nötzel; Hannes G Kenngott; Ron Kikinis; Lars Mündermann; Nassir Navab; Sinan Onogur; Tobias Roß; Raphael Sznitman; Russell H Taylor; Minu D Tizabi; Martin Wagner; Gregory D Hager; Thomas Neumuth; Nicolas Padoy; Justin Collins; Ines Gockel; Jan Goedeke; Daniel A Hashimoto; Luc Joyeux; Kyle Lam; Daniel R Leff; Amin Madani; Hani J Marcus; Ozanan Meireles; Alexander Seitel; Dogu Teber; Frank Ückert; Beat P Müller-Stich; Pierre Jannin; Stefanie Speidel
Journal:  Med Image Anal       Date:  2021-11-18       Impact factor: 13.828

Review 4.  The current state of navigation in robotic spine surgery.

Authors:  Meng Huang; Tyler A Tetreault; Avani Vaishnav; Philip J York; Blake N Staub
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2021-01

5.  The accuracy and effectiveness of automatic pedicle screw trajectory planning based on computer tomography values: an in vitro osteoporosis model study.

Authors:  Jia Bin Liu; Rui Zuo; Wen Jie Zheng; Chang Qing Li; Chao Zhang; Yue Zhou
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2022-02-21       Impact factor: 2.362

Review 6.  Discussion on the possibility of multi-layer intelligent technologies to achieve the best recover of musculoskeletal injuries: Smart materials, variable structures, and intelligent therapeutic planning.

Authors:  Na Guo; Jiawen Tian; Litao Wang; Kai Sun; Lixin Mi; Hao Ming; Zhao Zhe; Fuchun Sun
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2022-09-30
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.