ArticleMedical & biological engineering & computing2026
3D ultrasound shape completion and anatomical feature detection for minimally invasive spine surgery.
Article in Medical & biological engineering & computing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative study of ultrasound shape completion and CBCT-based AR workflows for spinal needle interventions.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2026Article
- A Coarse-to-Fine Framework with Curvature Feature Learning for Robust Point Cloud Registration in Spinal Surgical Navigation.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Ultrasound (US) with 3D reconstruction is being explored to offer a radiation-free approach to visualizing anatomical structures. Such a method could be useful for navigating and assisting minimally invasive spine surgery where direct sight on the surgical site is absent. During surgery, the pre-operative CT model and surgical plans are registered to the patient's anatomy by using intra-operative US reconstruction. However, accurate and automatic registration remains challenging. This difficulty arises from an incomplete detection of the bone geometry in US images and the challenges in identifying anatomical landmarks. To address the problem, this work presents a pipeline to automate the workflow by offering an initial CT-to-US registration. This work utilizes PointAttN for 3D shape completion that completes occluded bone structures from partial US reconstruction. This enriched point cloud is then segmented using PointNet++ to identify specific anatomical features. To train the network, synthetic 3D representations of partial views are generated from fifty CT models of the lumbar spine by simulating US physics, effectively mimicking the intraoperative scenario. The proposed work yields a mean registration error of 1.34 mm and 1.63 mm on real US reconstructions of agar phantoms and an ex vivo human spine, respectively. This comprehensive 3D representation enhances anatomical feature interpretation, enabling robust automatic registration. The clinical potential of this framework merits further investigation in pre-clinical trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40261475What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.