Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38472429›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 Society2024

Deep-learning reconstructed lumbar spine 3D MRI for surgical planning: pedicle screw placement and geometric measurements compared to CT.

Frederik Abel, Darren R Lebl, George Gorgy, David Dalton, J Levi Chazen, Elisha Lim, Qian Li, Darryl B Sneag, Ek T Tan

Abstract readComparative Study
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, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Frederik AbelDepartment of Radiology and Imaging, Hospital for Special Surgery, 535 E 70th Street, New York, NY, 10021, USA. frederikabel@gmx.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8988-6917
Darren R LeblDepartment of Spine Surgery, Hospital for Special Surgery, 535 E 70th Street, New York, NY, 10021, USA.
George GorgyDepartment of Spine Surgery, Hospital for Special Surgery, 535 E 70th Street, New York, NY, 10021, USA.
David DaltonDepartment of Spine Surgery, Hospital for Special Surgery, 535 E 70th Street, New York, NY, 10021, USA.
J Levi ChazenDepartment of Radiology and Imaging, Hospital for Special Surgery, 535 E 70th Street, New York, NY, 10021, USA.
Elisha LimDepartment of Radiology and Imaging, Hospital for Special Surgery, 535 E 70th Street, New York, NY, 10021, USA.
Qian LiBiostatistics Core, Hospital for Special Surgery, 535 E 70th Street, New York, NY, 10021, USA.
Darryl B SneagDepartment of Radiology and Imaging, Hospital for Special Surgery, 535 E 70th Street, New York, NY, 10021, USA.
Ek T TanDepartment of Radiology and Imaging, Hospital for Special Surgery, 535 E 70th Street, New York, NY, 10021, USA.
Hospital for Special Surgery · US

Funding

Medtronic ERP-2021-12771
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo test equivalency of deep-learning 3D lumbar spine MRI with "CT-like" contrast to CT for virtual pedicle screw planning and geometric measurements in robotic-navigated spinal surgery.

methodsBetween December 2021 and June 2022, 16 patients referred for spinal fusion and decompression surgery with pre-operative CT and 3D MRI were retrospectively assessed. Pedicle screws were virtually placed on lumbar (L1-L5) and sacral (S1) vertebrae by three spine surgeons, and metrics (lateral deviation, axial/sagittal angles) were collected. Vertebral body length/width (VL/VW) and pedicle height/width (PH/PW) were measured at L1-L5 by three radiologists. Analysis included equivalency testing using the 95% confidence interval (CI), a margin of ± 1 mm (± 2.08° for angles), and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs).

resultsAcross all vertebral levels, both combined and separately, equivalency between CT and MRI was proven for all pedicle screw metrics and geometric measurements, except for VL at L1 (mean difference: - 0.64 mm; [95%CI - 1.05, - 0.24]), L2 (- 0.65 mm; [95%CI - 1.11, - 0.20]), and L4 (- 0.78 mm; [95%CI - 1.11, - 0.46]). Inter- and intra-rater ICC for screw metrics across all vertebral levels combined ranged from 0.68 to 0.91 and 0.89-0.98 for CT, and from 0.62 to 0.92 and 0.81-0.97 for MRI, respectively. Inter- and intra-rater ICC for geometric measurements ranged from 0.60 to 0.95 and 0.84-0.97 for CT, and 0.61-0.95 and 0.93-0.98 for MRI, respectively.

conclusionDeep-learning 3D MRI facilitates equivalent virtual pedicle screw placements and geometric assessments for most lumbar vertebrae, with the exception of vertebral body length at L1, L2, and L4, compared to CT for pre-operative planning in patients considered for robotic-navigated spine surgery.

Indexed as

Deep LearningImaging, Three-DimensionalLumbar VertebraeMagnetic Resonance ImagingPedicle ScrewsSpinal FusionTomography, X-Ray ComputedAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective Studies3D MRICTDeep learningLumbar spinePedicle screwRobotic-navigated assistance

Identifiers

PMID38472429
OpenAlexW4394766607

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.