A Statistical Shape Model of the Human Second Cervical Vertebra

Overview

Journal Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg

Publisher Springer

Specialties General Surgery
Radiology

Date 2014 Oct 31

PMID 25354900

Citations 8

Authors

Marine Clogenson

John M Duff

Marcel Luethi

Marc Levivier

Reto Meuli

Charles Baur

Simon Henein

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: Statistical shape and appearance models play an important role in reducing the segmentation processing time of a vertebra and in improving results for 3D model development. Here, we describe the different steps in generating a statistical shape model (SSM) of the second cervical vertebra (C2) and provide the shape model for general use by the scientific community. The main difficulties in its construction are the morphological complexity of the C2 and its variability in the population.

Methods: The input dataset is composed of manually segmented anonymized patient computerized tomography (CT) scans. The alignment of the different datasets is done with the procrustes alignment on surface models, and then, the registration is cast as a model-fitting problem using a Gaussian process. A principal component analysis (PCA)-based model is generated which includes the variability of the C2.

Results: The SSM was generated using 92 CT scans. The resulting SSM was evaluated for specificity, compactness and generalization ability. The SSM of the C2 is freely available to the scientific community in Slicer (an open source software for image analysis and scientific visualization) with a module created to visualize the SSM using Statismo, a framework for statistical shape modeling.

Conclusion: The SSM of the vertebra allows the shape variability of the C2 to be represented. Moreover, the SSM will enable semi-automatic segmentation and 3D model generation of the vertebra, which would greatly benefit surgery planning.

Citing Articles

In-house three-dimensional printing for surgical planning: learning curve from a case series of temporomandibular joint and related disorders.

Godinho M, Mestrinho L Front Vet Sci. 2024; 11:1347107.

PMID: 38379923 PMC: 10876850. DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2024.1347107.

Bone density optimized pedicle screw insertion.

Tsagkaris C, Calek A, Fasser M, Spirig J, Caprara S, Farshad M Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2023; 11:1270522.

PMID: 37954015 PMC: 10639121. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2023.1270522.

Machine learning for image analysis in the cervical spine: Systematic review of the available models and methods.

Goedmakers C, Pereboom L, Schoones J, de Leeuw den Bouter M, Remis R, Staring M Brain Spine. 2022; 2:101666.

PMID: 36506292 PMC: 9729832. DOI: 10.1016/j.bas.2022.101666.

Statistical shape modelling of the thoracic spine for the development of pedicle screw insertion guides.

Wai G, Rusli W, Ghouse S, Kieser D, Kedgley A, Newell N Biomech Model Mechanobiol. 2022; 22(1):123-132.

PMID: 36121529 PMC: 9958142. DOI: 10.1007/s10237-022-01636-8.

Statistical shape model of the talus bone morphology: A comparison between impinged and nonimpinged ankles.

Arbabi S, Seevinck P, Weinans H, de Jong P, Sturkenboom J, van Hamersvelt R J Orthop Res. 2022; 41(1):183-195.

PMID: 35289957 PMC: 10084311. DOI: 10.1002/jor.25328.

References

Kostrzewski S, Duff J, Baur C, Olszewski M . Robotic system for cervical spine surgery. Int J Med Robot. 2011; 8(2):184-90. DOI: 10.1002/rcs.446. View

Mirzaalian H, Wels M, Heimann T, Kelm B, Suehling M . Fast and robust 3D vertebra segmentation using statistical shape models. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2013; 2013:3379-82. DOI: 10.1109/EMBC.2013.6610266. View

Fedorov A, Beichel R, Kalpathy-Cramer J, Finet J, Fillion-Robin J, Pujol S . 3D Slicer as an image computing platform for the Quantitative Imaging Network. Magn Reson Imaging. 2012; 30(9):1323-41. PMC: 3466397. DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2012.05.001. View

Verma R, Krishan S, Haendlmayer K, Mohsen A . Functional outcome of computer-assisted spinal pedicle screw placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 23 studies including 5,992 pedicle screws. Eur Spine J. 2010; 19(3):370-5. PMC: 2899753. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-009-1258-4. View

Rasoulian A, Rohling R, Abolmaesumi P . Group-wise registration of point sets for statistical shape models. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2012; 31(11):2025-34. DOI: 10.1109/TMI.2012.2202913. View

Sarkalkan N, Weinans H, Zadpoor A . Statistical shape and appearance models of bones. Bone. 2013; 60:129-40. DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2013.12.006. View

Kistler M, Bonaretti S, Pfahrer M, Niklaus R, Buchler P . The virtual skeleton database: an open access repository for biomedical research and collaboration. J Med Internet Res. 2013; 15(11):e245. PMC: 3841349. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.2930. View

Kosmopoulos V, Schizas C . Pedicle screw placement accuracy: a meta-analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007; 32(3):E111-20. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000254048.79024.8b. View

Madawi A, Casey A, Solanki G, Tuite G, Veres R, Crockard H . Radiological and anatomical evaluation of the atlantoaxial transarticular screw fixation technique. J Neurosurg. 1997; 86(6):961-8. DOI: 10.3171/jns.1997.86.6.0961. View

10.

Weidner A, Wahler M, Chiu S, Ullrich C . Modification of C1-C2 transarticular screw fixation by image-guided surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000; 25(20):2668-73; discussion 2674. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200010150-00020. View

11.

Ishikawa Y, Kanemura T, Yoshida G, Ito Z, Muramoto A, Ohno S . Clinical accuracy of three-dimensional fluoroscopy-based computer-assisted cervical pedicle screw placement: a retrospective comparative study of conventional versus computer-assisted cervical pedicle screw placement. J Neurosurg Spine. 2010; 13(5):606-11. DOI: 10.3171/2010.5.SPINE09993. View

12.

Sharma N, Aggarwal L . Automated medical image segmentation techniques. J Med Phys. 2010; 35(1):3-14. PMC: 2825001. DOI: 10.4103/0971-6203.58777. View

13.

Heimann T, Meinzer H . Statistical shape models for 3D medical image segmentation: a review. Med Image Anal. 2009; 13(4):543-63. DOI: 10.1016/j.media.2009.05.004. View

14.

Ito H, Neo M, Yoshida M, Fujibayashi S, Yoshitomi H, Nakamura T . Efficacy of computer-assisted pedicle screw insertion for cervical instability in RA patients. Rheumatol Int. 2006; 27(6):567-74. DOI: 10.1007/s00296-006-0256-7. View

15.

Zheng G, Nolte L, Ferguson S . Scaled, patient-specific 3D vertebral model reconstruction based on 2D lateral fluoroscopy. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2010; 6(3):351-66. DOI: 10.1007/s11548-010-0515-7. View

16.

Styner M, Oguz I, Xu S, Brechbuhler C, Pantazis D, Levitt J . Framework for the Statistical Shape Analysis of Brain Structures using SPHARM-PDM. Insight J. 2011; (1071):242-250. PMC: 3062073. View

17.

Richter M, Mattes T, Cakir B . Computer-assisted posterior instrumentation of the cervical and cervico-thoracic spine. Eur Spine J. 2003; 13(1):50-9. PMC: 3468035. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-003-0604-1. View

18.

Neo M, Fujibayashi S, Miyata M, Takemoto M, Nakamura T . Vertebral artery injury during cervical spine surgery: a survey of more than 5600 operations. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008; 33(7):779-85. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31816957a7. View

19.

Rampersaud Y, Pik J, Salonen D, Farooq S . Clinical accuracy of fluoroscopic computer-assisted pedicle screw fixation: a CT analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005; 30(7):E183-90. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000157490.65706.38. View

20.

Karaikovic E, Yingsakmongkol W, Gaines Jr R . Accuracy of cervical pedicle screw placement using the funnel technique. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001; 26(22):2456-62. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200111150-00012. View