Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39883162›Full record

SynthesisEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2025

Artificial intelligence for segmentation and classification in lumbar spinal stenosis: an overview of current methods.

E J A Verheijen, T Kapogiannis, D Munteh, J Chabros, M Staring, T R Smith, C L A Vleggeert-Lankamp

Erratum issuedAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Benchmarking deep learning pipelines for surgical instrument segmentation in endoscopic spine surgery: cross-dataset evaluation under deployment-realistic conditions.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 · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

E J A VerheijenComputational Neuroscience Outcomes Center, Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA. e.j.a.verheijen@lumc.nl.ORCID 0000-0001-9202-4496
T KapogiannisComputational Neuroscience Outcomes Center, Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA.
D MuntehComputational Neuroscience Outcomes Center, Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA.
J ChabrosComputational Neuroscience Outcomes Center, Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA.
M StaringDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
T R SmithComputational Neuroscience Outcomes Center, Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA.
C L A Vleggeert-LankampDepartment of Neurosurgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeLumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a frequently occurring condition defined by narrowing of the spinal or nerve root canal due to degenerative changes. Physicians use MRI scans to determine the severity of stenosis, occasionally complementing it with X-ray or CT scans during the diagnostic work-up. However, manual grading of stenosis is time-consuming and induces inter-reader variability as a standardized grading system is lacking. Machine Learning (ML) has the potential to aid physicians in this process by automating segmentation and classification of LSS. However, it is unclear what models currently exist to perform these tasks.

methodsA systematic review of literature was performed by searching the Cochrane Library, Embase, Emcare, PubMed, and Web of Science databases for studies describing an ML-based algorithm to perform segmentation or classification of the lumbar spine for LSS. Risk of bias was assessed through an adjusted version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale that was more applicable to ML studies. Qualitative analyses were performed based on type of algorithm (conventional ML or Deep Learning (DL)) and task (segmentation or classification).

resultsA total of 27 articles were included of which nine on segmentation, 16 on classification and 2 on both tasks. The majority of studies focused on algorithms for MRI analysis. There was wide variety among the outcome measures used to express model performance. Overall, ML algorithms are able to perform segmentation and classification tasks excellently. DL methods tend to demonstrate better performance than conventional ML models. For segmentation the best performing DL models were U-Net based. For classification U-Net and unspecified CNNs powered the models that performed the best for the majority of outcome metrics. The number of models with external validation was limited.

conclusionDL models achieve excellent performance for segmentation and classification tasks for LSS, outperforming conventional ML algorithms. However, comparisons between studies are challenging due to the variety in outcome measures and test datasets. Future studies should focus on the segmentation task using DL models and utilize a standardized set of outcome measures and publicly available test dataset to express model performance. In addition, these models need to be externally validated to assess generalizability.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceLumbar VertebraeMachine LearningSpinal StenosisHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingArtificial intelligenceClassificationDeep learningLumbar spinal stenosisMachine learningSegmentation

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.