Quantitative vertebral morphometry in 3D

Identification of vertebral deformations in two dimensions (2D) is a challenging task due to the projective nature of radiographic images and natural anatomical variability of vertebrae. By generating detailed three-dimensional (3D) anatomical images, computed tomography (CT) enables accurate measurement of vertebral deformations. We present a novel approach to quantitative vertebral morphometry (QVM) based on parametric modeling of the vertebral body shape in 3D. A detailed 3D representation of the vertebral body shape is obtained by automatically aligning a parametric 3D model to vertebral bodies in CT images. The parameters of the 3D model describe clinically meaningful morphometric vertebral body features, and QVM in 3D is performed by comparing the parameters to their statistical values. By applying statistical classification analysis, thresholds and parameters that best discriminate between normal and fractured vertebral bodies are determined. The proposed QVM in 3D was applied to 454 normal and 228 fractured vertebral bodies, yielding classification sensitivity of 92:5% at 7:5% specificity, with corresponding accuracy of 92:5% and precision of 86:1%. The 3D shape parameters that provided the best separation between normal and fractured vertebral bodies were the vertebral body height, and the inclination and concavity of both vertebral endplates. The described QVM in 3D is able to efficiently discriminate between normal and fractured vertebral bodies, and identify morphological cases (wedge, (bi)concavity, crush) and grades (1, 2, 3) of vertebral body deformations. It may be therefore valuable for diagnosing and predicting vertebral fractures in patients who are at risk of osteoporosis.

[1]  Alan Brett,et al.  Development of a Clinical Workflow Tool to Enhance the Detection of Vertebral Fractures: Accuracy and Precision Evaluation , 2009, Spine.

[2]  M M Panjabi,et al.  Thoracic Human Vertebrae Quantitative Three‐Dimensional Anatomy , 1991, Spine.

[3]  M M Panjabi,et al.  Human Lumbar Vertebrae: Quantitative Three-Dimensional Anatomy , 1992, Spine.

[4]  S. Cummings,et al.  Comparison of semiquantitative visual and quantitative morphometric assessment of prevalent and incident vertebral fractures in osteoporosis , 1996 .

[5]  J. Adams,et al.  Identification of vertebral fractures: An update , 2005, Osteoporosis International.

[6]  C. Cooper,et al.  Vertebral Fractures Predict Subsequent Fractures , 1999, Osteoporosis International.

[7]  O. Johnell,et al.  Epidemiology of osteoporotic fractures , 2005, Osteoporosis International.

[8]  B. Likar,et al.  Quantitative vertebral morphometry based on parametric modeling of vertebral bodies in 3D , 2013, Osteoporosis International.

[9]  R. Whitehouse,et al.  Under-reporting of osteoporotic vertebral fractures on computed tomography. , 2009, European journal of radiology.

[10]  R. Eastell,et al.  Classification of vertebral fractures , 1991, Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

[11]  H. K. Genant,et al.  Identification of prevalent vertebral fractures using CT lateral scout views: a comparison of semi-automated quantitative vertebral morphometry and radiologist semi-quantitative grading , 2012, Osteoporosis International.

[12]  D. Kiel,et al.  Intra-and inter-reader reliability of semi-automated quantitative morphometry measurements and vertebral fracture assessment using lateral scout views from computed tomography , 2011, Osteoporosis International.

[13]  R. Ziegler,et al.  A newly developed spine deformity index (SDI) to quantitate vertebral crush fractures in patients with osteoporosis. , 1988, Bone and mineral.

[14]  Bostjan Likar,et al.  Automatic measurement of vertebral body deformations in CT images based on a 3D parametric model , 2012, Medical Imaging.

[15]  Tim Cootes,et al.  Semi-automatic determination of detailed vertebral shape from lumbar radiographs using active appearance models , 2011, Osteoporosis International.

[16]  Tim Cootes,et al.  Detection of vertebral fractures in DXA VFA images using statistical models of appearance and a semi-automatic segmentation , 2010, Osteoporosis International.

[17]  E K Woo,et al.  Incidental vertebral fractures on multidetector CT images of the chest: prevalence and recognition. , 2008, Clinical radiology.

[18]  T. Spector,et al.  The assessment of vertebral deformity: A method for use in population studies and clinical trials , 1993, Osteoporosis International.

[19]  P. M. Parizel,et al.  Trauma of the spine and spinal cord: imaging strategies , 2010, European spine journal.

[20]  M. Nevitt,et al.  Vertebral fracture assessment using a semiquantitative technique , 1993, Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

[21]  Richard Eastell,et al.  Algorithm‐Based Qualitative and Semiquantitative Identification of Prevalent Vertebral Fracture: Agreement Between Different Readers, Imaging Modalities, and Diagnostic Approaches , 2007, Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

[22]  S. H. Kan,et al.  Epidemiology of vertebral fractures in women. , 1989, American journal of epidemiology.

[23]  Christian Roux,et al.  Vertebral Fracture Assessment: the 2007 ISCD Official Positions. , 2008, Journal of clinical densitometry : the official journal of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry.

[24]  Martin Roberts,et al.  Vertebral Morphometry: Semiautomatic Determination of Detailed Shape From Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry Images Using Active Appearance Models , 2006, Investigative radiology.

[25]  P P Smyth,et al.  Vertebral shape: automatic measurement with active shape models. , 1999, Radiology.

[26]  Boštjan Likar,et al.  Parametric modelling and segmentation of vertebral bodies in 3D CT and MR spine images , 2011, Physics in medicine and biology.

[27]  H. Genant,et al.  Underdiagnosis of Vertebral Fractures Is a Worldwide Problem: The IMPACT Study , 2004, Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

[28]  Christopher J. Taylor,et al.  Automatic measurement of vertebral shape using active shape models , 1997, Image Vis. Comput..

[29]  F. Pernus,et al.  Automated detection of spinal centrelines, vertebral bodies and intervertebral discs in CT and MR images of lumbar spine , 2010, Physics in medicine and biology.

[30]  R. Eastell,et al.  Comparison of methods for the visual identification of prevalent vertebral fracture in osteoporosis , 2004, Osteoporosis International.

[31]  M. Roberts,et al.  Quantitative vertebral fracture detection on DXA images using shape and appearance models. , 2007, Academic radiology.

[32]  Marleen de Bruijne,et al.  Quantitative vertebral morphometry using neighbor-conditional shape models , 2007, Medical Image Anal..

[33]  T. Nihashi,et al.  Can you diagnose for vertebral fracture correctly by plain X-ray? , 2006, Osteoporosis International.

[34]  Gali Dar,et al.  Vertebral body shape variation in the thoracic and lumbar spine: Characterization of its asymmetry and wedging , 2008, Clinical anatomy.

[35]  Francesco Palmieri,et al.  Reproducibility of a semi-automatic method for 6-point vertebral morphometry in a multi-centre trial. , 2009, European journal of radiology.

[36]  S. Gehlbach,et al.  Recognition of Vertebral Fracture in a Clinical Setting , 2000, Osteoporosis International.