Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24744126›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2014

Intraoperative detection and localization of cylindrical implants in cone-beam CT image data.

Joseph Görres, Michael Brehler, Jochen Franke, Karl Barth, Sven Y Vetter, Andrés Córdova, Paul A Grützner, Hans-Peter Meinzer, Ivo Wolf, Diana Nabers

Abstract readEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Articular surface segmentation using active shape models for intraoperative implant assessment.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2016
    Article
  7. Intra-operative assessment of fractured articular surfaces in cone beam CT image data.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2016
    Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Joseph GörresDivision of Medical and Biological Informatics (E130), German Cancer Research Center, Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120 , Heidelberg, Germany. j.goerres@dkfz-heidelberg.de.
Michael BrehlerDivision of Medical and Biological Informatics (E130), German Cancer Research Center, Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120 , Heidelberg, Germany.
Jochen FrankeBG Trauma Center, Ludwig-Guttmann-Straße 13, 67071 , Ludwigshafen am Rhein, Germany.
Karl BarthSiemens AG, Healthcare Sector, Henkestr. 127, 91052 , Erlangen, Germany.
Sven Y VetterBG Trauma Center, Ludwig-Guttmann-Straße 13, 67071 , Ludwigshafen am Rhein, Germany.
Andrés CórdovaClínica Alemana de Santiago, Avenida Vitacura 5951, Santiago de Chile, Chile.
Paul A GrütznerBG Trauma Center, Ludwig-Guttmann-Straße 13, 67071 , Ludwigshafen am Rhein, Germany.
Hans-Peter MeinzerDivision of Medical and Biological Informatics (E130), German Cancer Research Center, Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120 , Heidelberg, Germany.
Ivo WolfMannheim University of Applied Sciences, Paul-Wittsack-Str. 10, 68163 , Mannheim, Germany.
Diana NabersDivision of Medical and Biological Informatics (E130), German Cancer Research Center, Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120 , Heidelberg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeOrthopedic fractures are often fixed using metal implants. The correct positioning of cylindrical implants such as surgical screws, rods and guide wires is highly important. Intraoperative 3D imaging is often used to ensure proper implant placement. However, 3D image interaction is time-consuming and requires experience. We developed an automatic method that simplifies and accelerates location assessment of cylindrical implants in 3D images.

methodsOur approach is composed of three major steps. At first, cylindrical characteristics are detected by analyzing image gradients in small image regions. Next, these characteristics are grouped in a cluster analysis. The clusters represent cylindrical implants and are used to initialize a cylinder-to-image registration. Finally, the two end points are optimized regarding image contrast along the cylinder axis.

resultsA total of 67 images containing 420 cylindrical implants were used for testing. Different anatomical regions (calcaneus, spine) and various image sources (two mobile devices, three reconstruction methods) were investigated. Depending on the evaluation set, the detection performance was between 91.7 and 96.1% true- positive rate with a false-positive rate between 2.0 and 3.2%. The end point distance errors ranged from [Formula: see text] to [Formula: see text] mm and the orientation errors from [Formula: see text] to [Formula: see text] degrees. The average computation time was less than 5 seconds.

conclusionsAn automatic method was developed and tested that obviates the need for 3D image interaction during intraoperative assessment of cylindrical orthopedic implants. The required time for working with the viewing software of cone-beam CT device is drastically reduced and leads to a shorter time under anesthesia for the patient.

Indexed as

Prostheses and ImplantsCalcaneusCone-Beam Computed TomographyHumansImaging, Three-DimensionalMonitoring, IntraoperativeOrthopedic ProceduresSoftwareSpineCalcaneusClusteringCylinder detectionInternal fixationIntraoperative ImagingPCARANSACSegmentationSpine

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.