1
|
Zhang X, Uneri A, Huang Y, Jones CK, Witham TF, Helm PA, Siewerdsen JH. Deformable 3D-2D image registration and analysis of global spinal alignment in long-length intraoperative spine imaging. Med Phys 2022; 49:5715-5727. [PMID: 35762028 DOI: 10.1002/mp.15819] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/15/2022] [Revised: 06/03/2022] [Accepted: 06/13/2022] [Indexed: 11/06/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Spinal deformation during surgical intervention (caused by patient positioning and/or correction of malalignment) confounds conventional navigation due to assumptions of rigid transformation. Moreover, the ability to accurately quantify spinal alignment in the operating room would provide assessment of the surgical product via metrics that correlate with clinical outcome. PURPOSE A method for deformable 3D-2D registration of preoperative CT to intraoperative long-length tomosynthesis images is reported for accurate 3D evaluation of device placement in the presence of spinal deformation and automated evaluation of global spinal alignment (GSA). METHODS Long-length tomosynthesis ("Long Film", LF) images were acquired using an O-arm™ imaging system (Medtronic, Minneapolis USA). A deformable 3D-2D patient registration was developed using multi-scale masking (proceeding from the full-length image to local subvolumes about each vertebra) to transform vertebral labels and planning information from preoperative CT to the LF images. Automatic measurement of GSA [Main Thoracic Kyphosis (MThK) and Lumbar Lordosis (LL)] was obtained using a spline fit to registered labels. The "Known-Component Registration" (KC-Reg) method for device registration was adapted to the multi-scale process for 3D device localization from orthogonal LF images. The multi-scale framework was evaluated using a deformable spine phantom in which pedicle screws were inserted, and deformations were induced over a range in LL ∼25-80°. Further validation was carried out in a cadaver study with implanted pedicle screws and a similar range of spinal deformation. The accuracy of patient and device registration was evaluated in terms of 3D translational error and target registration error (TRE), respectively, and the accuracy of automatic GSA measurements were compared to manual annotation. RESULTS Phantom studies demonstrated accurate registration via the multi-scale framework for all vertebral levels in both the neutral and deformed spine: median (interquartile range, IQR) patient registration error was 1.1 mm (0.7-1.9 mm IQR). Automatic measures of MThK and LL agreed with manual delineation within -1.1° ± 2.2° and 0.7° ± 2.0° (mean and standard deviation), respectively. Device registration error was 0.7 mm (0.4-1.0 mm IQR) at the screw tip and 0.9° (1.0°-1.5°) about the screw trajectory. Deformable 3D-2D registration significantly outperformed conventional rigid registration (p < 0.05), which exhibited device registration error of 2.1 mm (0.8-4.1 mm) and 4.1° (1.2°-9.5°). Cadaver studies verified performance under realistic conditions, demonstrating patient registration error of 1.6 mm (0.9-2.1 mm); MThK within -4.2° ± 6.8° and LL within 1.7° ± 3.5°; and device registration error of 0.8 mm (0.5-1.9 mm) and 0.7° (0.4°-1.2°) for the multi-scale deformable method, compared to 2.5 mm (1.0-7.9 mm) and 2.3° (1.6°-8.1°) for rigid registration (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION The deformable 3D-2D registration framework leverages long-length intraoperative imaging to achieve accurate patient and device registration over extended lengths of the spine (up to 64 cm) even with strong anatomical deformation. The method offers a new means for quantitative validation of spinal correction (intraoperative GSA measurement) and 3D verification of device placement in comparison to preoperative images and planning data. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xiaoxuan Zhang
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD
| | - Ali Uneri
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD
| | - Yixuan Huang
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD
| | - Craig K Jones
- The Malone Center for Engineering in Healthcare, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD
| | - Timothy F Witham
- Department of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD
| | | | - Jeffrey H Siewerdsen
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.,The Malone Center for Engineering in Healthcare, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.,Department of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Maier-Hein L, Eisenmann M, Sarikaya D, März K, Collins T, Malpani A, Fallert J, Feussner H, Giannarou S, Mascagni P, Nakawala H, Park A, Pugh C, Stoyanov D, Vedula SS, Cleary K, Fichtinger G, Forestier G, Gibaud B, Grantcharov T, Hashizume M, Heckmann-Nötzel D, Kenngott HG, Kikinis R, Mündermann L, Navab N, Onogur S, Roß T, Sznitman R, Taylor RH, Tizabi MD, Wagner M, Hager GD, Neumuth T, Padoy N, Collins J, Gockel I, Goedeke J, Hashimoto DA, Joyeux L, Lam K, Leff DR, Madani A, Marcus HJ, Meireles O, Seitel A, Teber D, Ückert F, Müller-Stich BP, Jannin P, Speidel S. Surgical data science - from concepts toward clinical translation. Med Image Anal 2022; 76:102306. [PMID: 34879287 PMCID: PMC9135051 DOI: 10.1016/j.media.2021.102306] [Citation(s) in RCA: 85] [Impact Index Per Article: 42.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2020] [Revised: 11/03/2021] [Accepted: 11/08/2021] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
Recent developments in data science in general and machine learning in particular have transformed the way experts envision the future of surgery. Surgical Data Science (SDS) is a new research field that aims to improve the quality of interventional healthcare through the capture, organization, analysis and modeling of data. While an increasing number of data-driven approaches and clinical applications have been studied in the fields of radiological and clinical data science, translational success stories are still lacking in surgery. In this publication, we shed light on the underlying reasons and provide a roadmap for future advances in the field. Based on an international workshop involving leading researchers in the field of SDS, we review current practice, key achievements and initiatives as well as available standards and tools for a number of topics relevant to the field, namely (1) infrastructure for data acquisition, storage and access in the presence of regulatory constraints, (2) data annotation and sharing and (3) data analytics. We further complement this technical perspective with (4) a review of currently available SDS products and the translational progress from academia and (5) a roadmap for faster clinical translation and exploitation of the full potential of SDS, based on an international multi-round Delphi process.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lena Maier-Hein
- Division of Computer Assisted Medical Interventions (CAMI), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany; Medical Faculty, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Matthias Eisenmann
- Division of Computer Assisted Medical Interventions (CAMI), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Duygu Sarikaya
- Department of Computer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey; LTSI, Inserm UMR 1099, University of Rennes 1, Rennes, France
| | - Keno März
- Division of Computer Assisted Medical Interventions (CAMI), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | | | - Anand Malpani
- The Malone Center for Engineering in Healthcare, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | | | - Hubertus Feussner
- Department of Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Stamatia Giannarou
- The Hamlyn Centre for Robotic Surgery, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Pietro Mascagni
- ICube, University of Strasbourg, CNRS, France; IHU Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France
| | | | - Adrian Park
- Department of Surgery, Anne Arundel Health System, Annapolis, Maryland, USA; Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Carla Pugh
- Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA
| | - Danail Stoyanov
- Wellcome/EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Swaroop S Vedula
- The Malone Center for Engineering in Healthcare, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Kevin Cleary
- The Sheikh Zayed Institute for Pediatric Surgical Innovation, Children's National Hospital, Washington, D.C., USA
| | | | - Germain Forestier
- L'Institut de Recherche en Informatique, Mathématiques, Automatique et Signal (IRIMAS), University of Haute-Alsace, Mulhouse, France; Faculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
| | - Bernard Gibaud
- LTSI, Inserm UMR 1099, University of Rennes 1, Rennes, France
| | - Teodor Grantcharov
- University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; The Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Makoto Hashizume
- Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan; Kitakyushu Koga Hospital, Fukuoka, Japan
| | - Doreen Heckmann-Nötzel
- Division of Computer Assisted Medical Interventions (CAMI), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Hannes G Kenngott
- Department for General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Ron Kikinis
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | | | - Nassir Navab
- Computer Aided Medical Procedures, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany; Department of Computer Science, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Sinan Onogur
- Division of Computer Assisted Medical Interventions (CAMI), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Tobias Roß
- Division of Computer Assisted Medical Interventions (CAMI), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Medical Faculty, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Raphael Sznitman
- ARTORG Center for Biomedical Engineering Research, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Russell H Taylor
- Department of Computer Science, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Minu D Tizabi
- Division of Computer Assisted Medical Interventions (CAMI), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Martin Wagner
- Department for General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Gregory D Hager
- The Malone Center for Engineering in Healthcare, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA; Department of Computer Science, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Thomas Neumuth
- Innovation Center Computer Assisted Surgery (ICCAS), University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Nicolas Padoy
- ICube, University of Strasbourg, CNRS, France; IHU Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France
| | - Justin Collins
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Ines Gockel
- Department of Visceral, Transplant, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, Leipzig University Hospital, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Jan Goedeke
- Pediatric Surgery, Dr. von Hauner Children's Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany
| | - Daniel A Hashimoto
- University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA; Surgical AI and Innovation Laboratory, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Luc Joyeux
- My FetUZ Fetal Research Center, Department of Development and Regeneration, Biomedical Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Center for Surgical Technologies, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division Woman and Child, Fetal Medicine Unit, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Michael E. DeBakey Department of Surgery, Texas Children's Hospital and Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Kyle Lam
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Daniel R Leff
- Department of BioSurgery and Surgical Technology, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom; Hamlyn Centre for Robotic Surgery, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom; Breast Unit, Imperial Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Amin Madani
- Department of Surgery, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Hani J Marcus
- National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, and UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London, United Kingdom
| | - Ozanan Meireles
- Massachusetts General Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Alexander Seitel
- Division of Computer Assisted Medical Interventions (CAMI), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Dogu Teber
- Department of Urology, City Hospital Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe, Germany
| | - Frank Ückert
- Institute for Applied Medical Informatics, Hamburg University Hospital, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Beat P Müller-Stich
- Department for General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Pierre Jannin
- LTSI, Inserm UMR 1099, University of Rennes 1, Rennes, France
| | - Stefanie Speidel
- Division of Translational Surgical Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT/UCC) Dresden, Dresden, Germany; Centre for Tactile Internet with Human-in-the-Loop (CeTI), TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Holden MS, O'Brien M, Malpani A, Naz H, Tseng YW, Ishii L, Swaroop Vedula S, Ishii M, Hager G. Reconstructing the nasal septum from instrument motion during septoplasty surgery. J Med Imaging (Bellingham) 2021; 8:065001. [PMID: 34796250 DOI: 10.1117/1.jmi.8.6.065001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/23/2020] [Accepted: 10/18/2021] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose: Surgery involves modifying anatomy to achieve a goal. Reconstructing anatomy can facilitate surgical care through surgical planning, real-time decision support, or anticipating outcomes. Tool motion is a rich source of data that can be used to quantify anatomy. Our work develops and validates a method for reconstructing the nasal septum from unstructured motion of the Cottle elevator during the elevation phase of septoplasty surgery, without need to explicitly delineate the surface of the septum. Approach: The proposed method uses iterative closest point registration to initially register a template septum to the tool motion. Subsequently, statistical shape modeling with iterative most likely oriented point registration is used to fit the reconstructed septum to Cottle tip position and orientation during flap elevation. Regularization of the shape model and transformation is incorporated. The proposed methods were validated on 10 septoplasty surgeries performed on cadavers by operators of varying experience level. Preoperative CT images of the cadaver septums were segmented as ground truth. Results: We estimated reconstruction error as the difference between the projections of the Cottle tip onto the surface of the reconstructed septum and the ground-truth septum segmented from the CT image. We found translational differences of 2.74 ( 2.06 - 2.81 ) mm and a rotational differences of 8.95 ( 7.11 - 10.55 ) deg between the reconstructed septum and the ground-truth septum [median (interquartile range)], given the optimal regularization parameters. Conclusions: Accurate reconstruction of the nasal septum can be achieved from tool tracking data during septoplasty surgery on cadavers. This enables understanding of the septal anatomy without need for traditional medical imaging. This result may be used to facilitate surgical planning, intraoperative care, or skills assessment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew S Holden
- Johns Hopkins University, Malone Center for Engineering in Healthcare, Baltimore, Maryland, United States.,Carleton University, School of Computer Science, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Molly O'Brien
- Johns Hopkins University, Malone Center for Engineering in Healthcare, Baltimore, Maryland, United States
| | - Anand Malpani
- Johns Hopkins University, Malone Center for Engineering in Healthcare, Baltimore, Maryland, United States
| | - Hajira Naz
- Johns Hopkins University, Malone Center for Engineering in Healthcare, Baltimore, Maryland, United States
| | - Ya-Wei Tseng
- Johns Hopkins University, Malone Center for Engineering in Healthcare, Baltimore, Maryland, United States
| | - Lisa Ishii
- Johns Hopkins University, School of Medicine, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Baltimore, Maryland, United States
| | - S Swaroop Vedula
- Johns Hopkins University, Malone Center for Engineering in Healthcare, Baltimore, Maryland, United States
| | - Masaru Ishii
- Johns Hopkins University, School of Medicine, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Baltimore, Maryland, United States
| | - Gregory Hager
- Johns Hopkins University, Malone Center for Engineering in Healthcare, Baltimore, Maryland, United States
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Lubelski D, Hersh A, Azad TD, Ehresman J, Pennington Z, Lehner K, Sciubba DM. Prediction Models in Degenerative Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review. Global Spine J 2021; 11:79S-88S. [PMID: 33890803 PMCID: PMC8076813 DOI: 10.1177/2192568220959037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN Systematic review. OBJECTIVES To review the existing literature of prediction models in degenerative spinal surgery. METHODS Review of PubMed/Medline and Embase databases was conducted to identify articles between January 1, 2000 and March 1, 2020 that reported prediction model performance for outcomes following elective degenerative spine surgery. RESULTS Thirty-one articles were included. Twenty studies were of thoracolumbar, 5 were of cervical, and 6 included all spine patients. Five studies were externally validated. Prediction models were developed using machine learning (42%) and logistic regression (42%) as well as other techniques. Web-based calculators were included in 45% of published articles. Various outcomes were investigated, including complications, infection, length of stay, discharge disposition, reoperation, readmission, disability score, back pain, leg pain, return to work, and opioid dependence. CONCLUSIONS Significant heterogeneity exists in methods used to develop prediction models of postoperative outcomes after degenerative spine surgery. Most internally validate their scores, but a few have been externally validated. Areas under the curve for most models range from 0.6 to 0.9. Techniques for development are becoming increasingly sophisticated with different machine learning tools. With further external validation, these models can be deployed online for patient, physician, and administrative use, and have the potential to optimize outcomes and maximize value in spine surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel Lubelski
- Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Andrew Hersh
- Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Tej D. Azad
- Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Jeff Ehresman
- Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | | | - Kurt Lehner
- Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Daniel M. Sciubba
- Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA,Daniel M. Sciubba, Department of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 600 North Wolfe Street, Meyer 5-185A, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Doerr SA, De Silva T, Vijayan R, Han R, Uneri A, Ketcha MD, Zhang X, Khanna N, Westbroek E, Jiang B, Zygourakis C, Aygun N, Theodore N, Siewerdsen JH. Automatic analysis of global spinal alignment from simple annotation of vertebral bodies. J Med Imaging (Bellingham) 2020; 7:035001. [PMID: 32411814 DOI: 10.1117/1.jmi.7.3.035001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/16/2019] [Accepted: 04/27/2020] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose: Measurement of global spinal alignment (GSA) is an important aspect of diagnosis and treatment evaluation for spinal deformity but is subject to a high level of inter-reader variability. Approach: Two methods for automatic GSA measurement are proposed to mitigate such variability and reduce the burden of manual measurements. Both approaches use vertebral labels in spine computed tomography (CT) as input: the first (EndSeg) segments vertebral endplates using input labels as seed points; and the second (SpNorm) computes a two-dimensional curvilinear fit to the input labels. Studies were performed to characterize the performance of EndSeg and SpNorm in comparison to manual GSA measurement by five clinicians, including measurements of proximal thoracic kyphosis, main thoracic kyphosis, and lumbar lordosis. Results: For the automatic methods, 93.8% of endplate angle estimates were within the inter-reader 95% confidence interval ( CI 95 ). All GSA measurements for the automatic methods were within the inter-reader CI 95 , and there was no statistically significant difference between automatic and manual methods. The SpNorm method appears particularly robust as it operates without segmentation. Conclusions: Such methods could improve the reproducibility and reliability of GSA measurements and are potentially suitable to applications in large datasets-e.g., for outcome assessment in surgical data science.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophia A Doerr
- Johns Hopkins University, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Baltimore, MD, United States
| | - Tharindu De Silva
- Johns Hopkins University, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Baltimore, MD, United States
| | - Rohan Vijayan
- Johns Hopkins University, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Baltimore, MD, United States
| | - Runze Han
- Johns Hopkins University, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Baltimore, MD, United States
| | - Ali Uneri
- Johns Hopkins University, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Baltimore, MD, United States
| | - Michael D Ketcha
- Johns Hopkins University, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Baltimore, MD, United States
| | - Xiaoxuan Zhang
- Johns Hopkins University, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Baltimore, MD, United States
| | - Nishanth Khanna
- Johns Hopkins University, Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Baltimore, MD, United States
| | - Erick Westbroek
- Johns Hopkins University, Department of Neurosurgery, Baltimore, MD, United States
| | - Bowen Jiang
- Johns Hopkins University, Department of Neurosurgery, Baltimore, MD, United States
| | - Corinna Zygourakis
- Johns Hopkins University, Department of Neurosurgery, Baltimore, MD, United States
| | - Nafi Aygun
- Johns Hopkins University, Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Baltimore, MD, United States
| | - Nicholas Theodore
- Johns Hopkins University, Department of Neurosurgery, Baltimore, MD, United States
| | - Jeffrey H Siewerdsen
- Johns Hopkins University, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Baltimore, MD, United States.,Johns Hopkins University, Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Baltimore, MD, United States.,Johns Hopkins University, Department of Neurosurgery, Baltimore, MD, United States
| |
Collapse
|