Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31584120›Full record

ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2019

Vertebral rotation estimation from frontal X-rays using a quasi-automated pedicle detection method.

Shahin Ebrahimi, Laurent Gajny, Claudio Vergari, Elsa D Angelini, Wafa Skalli

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Artificial Intelligence in Adult Spinal Deformity.Acta neurochirurgica. Supplement · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Shahin EbrahimiInstitut de Biomécanique Humaine Georges Charpak, Arts et Métiers Institute of Technology, Paris, France.
Laurent GajnyInstitut de Biomécanique Humaine Georges Charpak, Arts et Métiers Institute of Technology, Paris, France. Laurent.gajny@ensam.eu.ORCID 0000-0002-2775-0106
Claudio VergariInstitut de Biomécanique Humaine Georges Charpak, Arts et Métiers Institute of Technology, Paris, France.
Elsa D AngeliniLTCI, Department Image-Data-Signal, Telecom ParisTech, Paris, France.
Wafa SkalliInstitut de Biomécanique Humaine Georges Charpak, Arts et Métiers Institute of Technology, Paris, France.
Arts et Métiers · FRTélécom Paris · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMeasurement of vertebral axial rotation (VAR) is relevant for the assessment of scoliosis. Stokes method allows estimating VAR in frontal X-rays from the relative position of the pedicles and the vertebral body. This method requires identifying these landmarks for each vertebral level, which is time-consuming. In this work, a quasi-automated method for pedicle detection and VAR estimation was proposed.

methodA total of 149 healthy and adolescent idiopathic scoliotic (AIS) subjects were included in this retrospective study. Their frontal X-rays were collected from multiple sites and manually annotated to identify the spinal midline and pedicle positions. Then, an automated pedicle detector was developed based on image analysis, machine learning and fast manual identification of a few landmarks. VARs were calculated using the Stokes method in a validation dataset of 11 healthy (age 6-33 years) and 46 AIS subjects (age 6-16 years, Cobb 10°-46°), both from detected pedicles and those manually annotated to compare them. Sensitivity of pedicle location to the manual inputs was quantified on 20 scoliotic subjects, using 10 perturbed versions of the manual inputs.

resultsPedicles centers were localized with a precision of 84% and mean difference of 1.2 ± 1.2 mm, when comparing with manual identification. Comparison of VAR values between automated and manual pedicle localization yielded a signed difference of - 0.2 ± 3.4°. The uncertainty on pedicle location was smaller than 2 mm along each image axis.

conclusionThe proposed method allowed calculating VAR values in frontal radiographs with minimal user intervention and robust quasi-automated pedicle localization. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultChildHumansImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedRadiographyRetrospective StudiesRotationScoliosisSpineYoung AdultMachine learningPedicle detectionScoliosisVertebral axial rotationX-rays

Identifiers

PMID31584120
OpenAlexW2978660664

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.