Man versus machine: Automatic pedicle screw planning using registration‐based techniques compared with manual screw planning for thoracolumbar fusion surgeries

Ulf Bertram,István Kövesházi, Monika Michaelis,Simon Weidert, Teresa Schmidt,Christian Blume, F Zastrow, Christian‐Andreas Müller, Szilárd Szabó

International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery(2023)

引用 0|浏览3
暂无评分
摘要
This study evaluates the precision of a commercially available spine planning software in automatic spine labelling and screw-trajectory proposal.The software uses automatic segmentation and registration of the vertebra to generate screw proposals. 877 trajectories were compared. Four neurosurgeons assessed suggested trajectories, performed corrections, and manually planned pedicle screws. Additionally, automatic identification/labelling was evaluated.Automatic labelling was correct in 89% of the cases. 92.9% of automatically planned trajectories were in accordance with G&R grade A + B. Automatic mode reduced the time spent planning screw trajectories by 7 s per screw to 20 s per vertebra. Manual mode yielded differences in screw-length between surgeons (largest distribution peak: 5 mm), automatic in contrast at 0 mm. The size of suggested pedicle screws was significantly smaller (largest peaks in difference between 0.5 and 3 mm) than the surgeon's choice.Automatic identification of vertebrae works in most cases and suggested pedicle screw trajectories are acceptable. So far, it does not substitute for an experienced surgeon's assessment.
更多
查看译文
关键词
automatic pedicle screw planning,manual screw planning
AI 理解论文
溯源树
样例
生成溯源树,研究论文发展脉络
Chat Paper
正在生成论文摘要