Correlation Between a Novel Surface Topography Asymmetry Analysis and Radiographic Data in Scoliosis

STUDY DESIGN Cross-sectional study. OBJECTIVE To investigate the correlation between parameters extracted from a three-dimensional (3D) asymmetry analysis of the torso and the internal deformities of the spine presented on radiographs, including 1) curve number, direction and location; 2) location of the apical vertebra; and 3) curve severity. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA Surface topography (ST) is used to assess external torso deformities and may predict important characteristics of the underlying spinal curves. ST does not expose patients to radiation and could safely be used clinically for scoliosis patients. Most ST indices rely on anatomical landmarks on the torso and 2D measurements. METHODS The ability of a 3D markerless asymmetry technique to predict radiographic characteristics was assessed for 100 scoliosis patients with full torso ST scans. Twenty-four additional patients were used for validation. The number, direction, and location of curves were determined by three examiners using ST deviation color maps. The inter-method percentage of agreement and Kappa coefficient were estimated for each measure. Linear regression predicted the vertical location of the apical vertebra from ST. Curve severity (mild, moderate, severe) was predicted with a decision tree analysis using ST parameters. RESULTS The average percentage of agreement was 62%, 66%, and 23% for single, double, and triple curves, respectively. Curve direction was always correctly identified. The average percentages of agreement for curve location were 63%, 92%, and 62% for proximal thoracic, thoracic/thoracolumbar (T-TL), and lumbar (L) curves, respectively. Apical vertebra location was predicted with R2 = 0.89 for T-TL and R2 = 0.58 for L curves. ST parameters classified curve severity for T-TL and L curves with 73% and 59% accuracy, respectively. CONCLUSIONS The method presented here improves upon current ST techniques by using the entire torso surface and both a visual and quantitative representation of the asymmetry to better capture the torso deformity.

[1]  E. Robinson,et al.  Statistical assessment of two methods of measuring scoliosis before treatment. , 1983, Canadian Medical Association journal.

[2]  M S Moreland,et al.  Concordance of Back Surface Asymmetry and Spine Shape in Idiopathic Scoliosis , 1989, Spine.

[3]  Farida Cheriet,et al.  Accuracy assessment of human trunk surface 3D reconstructions from an optical digitising system , 2006, Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing.

[4]  G. Duval-Beaupère,et al.  Scoliosis at less than 30 degrees. Properties of the evolutivity (risk of progression). , 1985, Spine.

[5]  Ulf Liljenqvist,et al.  Rasterstereographic back shape analysis in idiopathic scoliosis after posterior correction and fusion. , 2003, Clinical biomechanics.

[6]  Nelson G. Durdle,et al.  Validating an imaging and analysis system for assessing torso deformities , 2008, Comput. Biol. Medicine.

[7]  D L Hill,et al.  Evaluation of a laser scanner for surface topography. , 2002, Studies in health technology and informatics.

[8]  D S Drummond,et al.  Scoliosis: incidence and natural history. A prospective epidemiological study. , 1978, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[9]  A. C. Kittleson,et al.  Measurement of scoliosis. , 1970, The American journal of roentgenology, radium therapy, and nuclear medicine.

[10]  A. Nachemson,et al.  Prediction of progression of the curve in girls who have adolescent idiopathic scoliosis of moderate severity. Logistic regression analysis based on data from The Brace Study of the Scoliosis Research Society. , 1995, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[11]  Steven Don,et al.  Radiosensitivity of children: potential for overexposure in CR and DR and magnitude of doses in ordinary radiographic examinations , 2004, Pediatric Radiology.

[12]  J. Boice,et al.  Breast cancer in women with scoliosis exposed to multiple diagnostic x rays. , 1989, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[13]  J. Webb,et al.  Patient and parental perception of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis before and after surgery in comparison with surface and radiographic measurements. , 2002, Spine.

[14]  Josien P. W. Pluim,et al.  Medical Imaging 2006: Image Processing , 2006 .

[15]  A. Alter,et al.  Scoliosis, incidence, and natural history: E. J. Rogala, D. S. Drummond, and J. Gurr. J Bone Joint Surg 60A:173–176: (March), 1978 , 1978 .

[16]  J. M. Carlson,et al.  The prediction of curve progression in untreated idiopathic scoliosis during growth. , 1984, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[17]  Marilyn Stovall,et al.  Breast Cancer Mortality After Diagnostic Radiography: Findings From the U.S. Scoliosis Cohort Study , 2000, Spine.

[18]  Nelson G. Durdle,et al.  A Torso-Imaging System to Quantify the Deformity Associated With Scoliosis , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement.

[19]  T N Theologis,et al.  Early Detection of Progression in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis by Measurement of Changes in Back Shape With the Integrated Shape Imaging System Scanner , 1997, Spine.

[20]  M S Moreland,et al.  Moiré fringe topography of the human body. , 1981, Medical instrumentation.

[21]  B V Reamy,et al.  Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: review and current concepts. , 2001, American family physician.

[22]  Farida Cheriet,et al.  Prediction of scoliosis curve type based on the analysis of trunk surface topography , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: From Nano to Macro.

[23]  Cobb,et al.  Outlines for the study of scoliosis , 1948 .

[24]  Nelson G. Durdle,et al.  Classifying torso deformity in scoliosis using orthogonal maps of the torso , 2007, Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing.

[25]  Samer Adeeb,et al.  Surface topography asymmetry maps categorizing external deformity in scoliosis. , 2014, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[26]  Marilyn Stovall,et al.  Multiple Diagnostic X-rays for Spine Deformities and Risk of Breast Cancer , 2008, Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention.

[27]  Nelson G. Durdle,et al.  Quantifying torso deformity in scoliosis , 2006, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[28]  H Labelle,et al.  Estimation of Spinal Deformity in Scoliosis From Torso Surface Cross Sections , 2001, Spine.

[29]  P. Dangerfield,et al.  The relationship between surface and radiological deformity in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: effect of change in body position , 2004, European Spine Journal.

[30]  S. Tredwell,et al.  The Use of the ISIS Optical Scanner in the Management of the Braced Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Patient , 1988, Spine.

[31]  M Kaliszer,et al.  Surface Topography, Cobb Angles, and Cosmetic Change in Scoliosis , 2001, Spine.

[32]  R J Jefferson,et al.  A method for analysis of back shape in scoliosis. , 1988, Journal of biomechanics.

[33]  S. Wientroub,et al.  Radiation-free quantitative assessment of scoliosis: a multi center prospective study , 2006, European Spine Journal.

[34]  R A Dickson,et al.  Assessment of scoliosis in children: low dose radiographic technique. , 1980, The British journal of radiology.

[35]  R. Lyon,et al.  Relationship between Quantec measurement and Cobb angle in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. , 2000, Journal of pediatric orthopedics.

[36]  Mateo Buendía,et al.  Quantifier variables of the back surface deformity obtained with a noninvasive structured light method: evaluation of their usefulness in idiopathic scoliosis diagnosis , 2006, European Spine Journal.