Reconstruction and positional accuracy of 3D ultrasound on vertebral phantoms for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis spinal surgery
- 84 Downloads
Determine the positional, rotational and reconstruction accuracy of a 3D ultrasound system to be used for image registration in navigation surgery.
A custom 3D ultrasound for spinal surgery image registration was developed using Optitrack Prime 13-W motion capture cameras and a SonixTablet Ultrasound System. Temporal and spatial calibration was completed to account for time latencies between the two systems and to ensure accurate motion tracking of the ultrasound transducer. A mock operating room capture volume with a pegboard grid was set up to allow phantoms to be placed at a variety of predetermined positions to validate accuracy measurements. Five custom-designed ultrasound phantoms were 3D printed to allow for a range of linear and angular dimensions to be measured when placed on the pegboard.
Temporal and spatial calibration was completed with measurement repeatabilities of 0.2 mm and 0.5° after calibration. The mean positional accuracy was within 0.4 mm, with all values within 0.5 mm within the critical surgical regions and 96% of values within 1 mm within the full capture volume. All orientation values were within 1.5°. Reconstruction accuracy was within 0.6 mm and 0.9° for geometrically shaped phantoms and 0.5 and 1.9° for vertebrae-mimicking phantoms.
The accuracy of the developed 3D ultrasound system meets the 1 mm and 5° requirements of spinal surgery from this study. Further repeatability studies and evaluation on vertebrae are needed to validate the system for surgical use.
KeywordsImage guidance 3D ultrasound Spinal surgery Scoliosis Navigation
Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis
This research was funded by the Alberta Spine Foundation. The first author of this research was funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council and Alberta Innovates: Technology Futures.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Human and animal rights
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
No individual patients were included in this study.
- 7.Coe JD, Arlet V, Donaldson W, Berven S, Hanson DS, Mudiyam R, Perra JH, Shaffrey CI (2006) Complications in spinal fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis in the new millennium. A report of the Scoliosis Research Society Morbidity and Mortality Committee. Spine 31:345–349. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000197188.76369.13 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 8.Kosmopoulos V, Schizas C (2007) Pedicle screw placement accuracy: a meta-analysis. Spine 32:E111–E120. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000254048.79024.8b CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 9.Reames DL, Smith JS, Fu K-MG, Polly DW, Ames CP, Berven SH, Perra JH, Glassman SD, McCarthy RE, Knapp RD, Heary R, Shaffrey CI, Scoliosis Research Society Morbidity and Mortality Committee (2011) Complications in the surgical treatment of 19,360 cases of pediatric scoliosis: a review of the scoliosis research society morbidity and mortality database. Spine 36:1484–1491. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0b013e3181f3a326 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 12.Chan A, Parent E, Narvacan K, San C, Lou E (2017) Intraoperative image guidance compared with free-hand methods in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis posterior spinal surgery: a systematic review on screw-related complications and breach rates. Spine J 17:1215–1229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2017.04.001 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 16.Ul Haque M, Shufflebarger HL, O’Brien M, Macagno A (2006) Radiation exposure during pedicle screw placement in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: is fluoroscopy safe? Spine 31:2516–2520. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000238675.91612.2f CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 18.Pearce MS, Salotti JA, Little MP, McHugh K, Lee C, Kim KP, Howe NL, Ronckers CM, Rajaraman P, Craft AW, Parker L, de González AB (2012) Radiation exposure from CT scans in childhood and subsequent risk of leukaemia and brain tumours: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 380:499–505. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60815-0 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 20.Nelson EM, Monazzam SM, Kim KD, Seibert JA, Klineberg EO (2014) Intraoperative fluoroscopy, portable X-ray, and CT: patient and operating room personnel radiation exposure in spinal surgery. Spine J Off J N Am Spine Soc 14:2985–2991. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2014.06.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.Mercier L, Langø T, Lindseth F, Collins DL (2005) A review of calibration techniques for freehand 3-D ultrasound systems. Ultrasound Med Biol 31:449–471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2004.11.015 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 30.Zheng R, Chan ACY, Chen W, Hill DL, Le LH, Hedden D, Moreau M, Mahood J, Southon S, Lou E (2015) Intra- and inter-rater reliability of coronal curvature measurement for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using ultrasonic imaging method: a pilot study. Spine Deform 3:151–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspd.2014.08.008 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 31.Chen Z, Wu B, Zhai X, Bai Y, Zhu X, Luo B, Chen X, Li C, Yang M, Xu K, Liu C, Wang C, Zhao Y, Wei X, Chen K, Yang W, Ta D, Li M (2015) Basic study for ultrasound-based navigation for pedicle screw insertion using transmission and backscattered methods. PLoS ONE 10:e0122392. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0122392 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 32.Chen TK, Abolmaesumi P, Thurston AD, Ellis RE (2006) Automated 3D freehand ultrasound calibration with real-time accuracy control. In: MICCAI international conference medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention, vol 9, pp 899–906Google Scholar
- 34.Narouze SN (ed) (2011) Atlas of ultrasound-guided procedures in interventional pain management [electronic resource]. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 35.Solberg OV, Lindseth F, Torp H, Blake RE, Nagelhus Hernes TA (2007) Freehand 3D ultrasound reconstruction algorithms: a review. Ultrasound Med Biol 33:991–1009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2007.02.015 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 41.Lim JS (1990) Two-dimensional signal and image processing. Prentice-Hall Inc., Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
- 42.Soille P (2003) Morphological image analysis: principles and applications, 2nd edn. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
- 43.Poulsen C, Pedersen PC, Szabo TL (2005) An optical registration method for 3D ultrasound freehand scanning. In: IEEE ultrasonics symposium, 2005, pp 1236–1240Google Scholar
- 44.Ioannou C, Sarris I, Yaqub MK, Noble JA, Javaid MK, Papageorghiou AT (2011) Surface area measurement using rendered three-dimensional ultrasound imaging: an in vitro phantom study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol Off J Int Soc Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 38:445–449. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.8984 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 45.Zenbutsu S, Igarashi T, Nakamura R, Nakaguchi T, Yamaguchi T (2013) 3D ultrasound assisted laparoscopic liver surgery by visualization of blood vessels. In: 2013 IEEE international ultrasonics symposium (IUS), pp 840–843Google Scholar