Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38317546›Full record

ArticleNeurospine2024

Whole Spine Segmentation Using Object Detection and Semantic Segmentation.

Raffaele Da Mutten, Olivier Zanier, Sven Theiler, Seung-Jun Ryu, Luca Regli, Carlo Serra, Victor E Staartjes

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurospine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The Application of Artificial Intelligence in Spine Surgery: A Scoping Review.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2025
    Article
  5. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Raffaele Da MuttenMachine Intelligence in Clinical Neuroscience (MICN) Laboratory, Department of Neurosurgery, Clinical Neuroscience Center, University Hospital Zürich, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Olivier ZanierMachine Intelligence in Clinical Neuroscience (MICN) Laboratory, Department of Neurosurgery, Clinical Neuroscience Center, University Hospital Zürich, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Sven TheilerMachine Intelligence in Clinical Neuroscience (MICN) Laboratory, Department of Neurosurgery, Clinical Neuroscience Center, University Hospital Zürich, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Seung-Jun RyuDepartment of Neurosurgery, Daejeon Eulji University Hospital, Eulji University Medical School, Daejeon, Korea.
Luca RegliMachine Intelligence in Clinical Neuroscience (MICN) Laboratory, Department of Neurosurgery, Clinical Neuroscience Center, University Hospital Zürich, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Carlo SerraMachine Intelligence in Clinical Neuroscience (MICN) Laboratory, Department of Neurosurgery, Clinical Neuroscience Center, University Hospital Zürich, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Victor E StaartjesMachine Intelligence in Clinical Neuroscience (MICN) Laboratory, Department of Neurosurgery, Clinical Neuroscience Center, University Hospital Zürich, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
University of Zurich · CHDaejeon Eulji Medical Center, Eulji University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveVirtual and augmented reality have enjoyed increased attention in spine surgery. Preoperative planning, pedicle screw placement, and surgical training are among the most studied use cases. Identifying osseous structures is a key aspect of navigating a 3-dimensional virtual reconstruction. To automate the otherwise time-consuming process of labeling vertebrae on each slice individually, we propose a fully automated pipeline that automates segmentation on computed tomography (CT) and which can form the basis for further virtual or augmented reality application and radiomic analysis.

methodsBased on a large public dataset of annotated vertebral CT scans, we first trained a YOLOv8m (You-Only-Look-Once algorithm, Version 8 and size medium) to detect each vertebra individually. On the then cropped images, a 2D-U-Net was developed and externally validated on 2 different public datasets.

resultsTwo hundred fourteen CT scans (cervical, thoracic, or lumbar spine) were used for model training, and 40 scans were used for external validation. Vertebra recognition achieved a mAP50 (mean average precision with Jaccard threshold of 0.5) of over 0.84, and the segmentation algorithm attained a mean Dice score of 0.75 ± 0.14 at internal, 0.77 ± 0.12 and 0.82 ± 0.14 at external validation, respectively.

conclusionWe propose a 2-stage approach consisting of single vertebra labeling by an object detection algorithm followed by semantic segmentation. In our externally validated pilot study, we demonstrate robust performance for our object detection network in identifying individual vertebrae, as well as for our segmentation model in precisely delineating the bony structures.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsArtificial intelligenceDeep learningMachine learningSpine

Identifiers

PMID38317546
PMCPMC10992645
OpenAlexW4391442300

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.