Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Predicting spinal profile using 3D non-contact surface scanning: Changes in surface topography as a predictor of internal spinal alignment. | LitMetric
Biomechanics and Spine Research Group, Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
Published: March 2020
AI Article Synopsis
Article Abstract
Introduction: 3D non-contact surface scanners capture highly accurate, calibrated images of surface topography for 3D structures. This study sought to establish the efficacy and accuracy of using 3D surface scanning to characterise spinal curvature and sagittal plane contour.
Methods: 10 healthy female adults with a mean age of 25 years, (standard deviation: 3.6 years) underwent both MRI and 3D surface scanning (3DSS) (Artec Eva, Artec Group Inc., Luxembourg) while lying in the lateral decubitus position on a rigid substrate. Prior to 3DSS, anatomical landmarks on the spinous processes of each participant were demarcated using stickers attached to the skin surface. Following 3DSS, oil capsules (fiducial markers) were overlaid on the stickers and the subject underwent MRI. MRI stacks were processed to measure the thoracolumbar spinous process locations, providing an anatomical reference. 3D coordinates for the markers (surface stickers and MRI oil capsules) and for the spinous processes mapped the spinal column profiles and were compared to assess the quality of fit between the 3DSS and MRI marker positions.
Results: The RMSE for the polynomials fit to the spinous process, fiducial and surface marker profiles ranged from 0.17-1.15mm for all subjects. The MRI fiducial marker location was well aligned with the spinous process profile in the thoracic and upper lumbar spine for nine of the subjects. Over the 10 subjects, the mean RMSE between the MRI and 3D scan sagittal profiles for all surface markers was 9.8mm (SD 4.2mm). Curvature was well matched for seven of the subjects, with two showing differing curvatures across the lumbar spine due to inconsistent subject positioning.
Conclusion: Comparison of the observed trends for vertebral position measured from MRI and 3DSS, suggested the surface markers may provide a useful method for measuring internal changes in sagittal curvature or skeletal changes.
