Verifying the accuracy and precision of foot bone segmentation from fan beam and cone beam computed tomography scans

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q3 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL
Eric D. Thorhauer , Corey Wukelic , Nicholas Entress , Jane B. Shofer , William R. Ledoux
{"title":"Verifying the accuracy and precision of foot bone segmentation from fan beam and cone beam computed tomography scans","authors":"Eric D. Thorhauer ,&nbsp;Corey Wukelic ,&nbsp;Nicholas Entress ,&nbsp;Jane B. Shofer ,&nbsp;William R. Ledoux","doi":"10.1016/j.medengphy.2025.104349","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Accurate segmentation of foot and ankle bones from computed tomography scans is an essential precursor to morphological comparison studies and model-based biplanar fluoroscopic tracking. Errors in modeling the bones may propagate into coordinate system definitions or affect arthrokinematic calculations. Cone beam computed tomography scanners with sensitive detectors offer a lower dose alternative to fan beam scanners, although with signal-to-noise ratio and tissue contrast tradeoffs. The primary aims of this study were to validate the accuracy of foot bone models (distal tibia, talus, calcaneus, navicular, first metatarsal, and proximal phalanx) generated using established semi-automatic segmentation techniques relative to ground truth laser scans of the dissected bone specimens and to compare the errors in models segmented from a fan beam scanner to those from a cone beam scanner. We found excellent between and within-operator intra-class correlation scores for segmentations (all &gt; 0.90). Voxel-based metrics revealed small but significant differences between scanner types when comparing the Dice score and precision of segmentations, with cone beam having higher scores for nearly every metric type. Surface-based error data also revealed cone beam scans to be more accurate to the actual bone morphology despite having noisier images. The small isotropic voxels of the cone beam scanner produced bone models with errors averaging 0.43 ± 0.11 mm compared to the fan beam average of 0.74 ± 0.15 mm error across all bones. The findings suggest that voxel resolution is more critical than scanner type for modeling foot bones and that these segmentation techniques may overcome the limitations in cone beam scanners. These outcomes support the growing movement towards more widespread adoption of low-dose cone beam weight-bearing computed tomography imaging for 3D modeling of foot and ankle bones for clinical and research purposes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49836,"journal":{"name":"Medical Engineering & Physics","volume":"140 ","pages":"Article 104349"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Engineering & Physics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1350453325000682","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Accurate segmentation of foot and ankle bones from computed tomography scans is an essential precursor to morphological comparison studies and model-based biplanar fluoroscopic tracking. Errors in modeling the bones may propagate into coordinate system definitions or affect arthrokinematic calculations. Cone beam computed tomography scanners with sensitive detectors offer a lower dose alternative to fan beam scanners, although with signal-to-noise ratio and tissue contrast tradeoffs. The primary aims of this study were to validate the accuracy of foot bone models (distal tibia, talus, calcaneus, navicular, first metatarsal, and proximal phalanx) generated using established semi-automatic segmentation techniques relative to ground truth laser scans of the dissected bone specimens and to compare the errors in models segmented from a fan beam scanner to those from a cone beam scanner. We found excellent between and within-operator intra-class correlation scores for segmentations (all > 0.90). Voxel-based metrics revealed small but significant differences between scanner types when comparing the Dice score and precision of segmentations, with cone beam having higher scores for nearly every metric type. Surface-based error data also revealed cone beam scans to be more accurate to the actual bone morphology despite having noisier images. The small isotropic voxels of the cone beam scanner produced bone models with errors averaging 0.43 ± 0.11 mm compared to the fan beam average of 0.74 ± 0.15 mm error across all bones. The findings suggest that voxel resolution is more critical than scanner type for modeling foot bones and that these segmentation techniques may overcome the limitations in cone beam scanners. These outcomes support the growing movement towards more widespread adoption of low-dose cone beam weight-bearing computed tomography imaging for 3D modeling of foot and ankle bones for clinical and research purposes.
验证了扇形梁和锥形梁计算机断层扫描脚骨分割的准确性和精密度
从计算机断层扫描中准确分割足部和踝关节骨骼是形态学比较研究和基于模型的双平面透视跟踪的必要前提。骨骼建模中的错误可能会传播到坐标系定义或影响关节运动学计算。锥形束计算机断层扫描仪与灵敏的探测器提供了较低的剂量替代风扇束扫描仪,尽管信噪比和组织对比度权衡。本研究的主要目的是验证使用已建立的半自动分割技术生成的足骨模型(胫骨远端、距骨、跟骨、舟骨、第一跖骨和近端指骨)的准确性,并比较扇形束扫描仪和锥形束扫描仪分割的模型的误差。我们发现分割的算子间和算子内类内相关分数都很好(所有>;0.90)。当比较Dice分数和分割精度时,基于体素的指标揭示了扫描仪类型之间微小但显著的差异,锥束几乎在每种指标类型中都有更高的分数。基于表面的误差数据还显示,尽管图像噪声较大,但锥束扫描对实际骨骼形态的准确性更高。锥形束扫描仪的小各向同性体素产生的骨模型平均误差为0.43±0.11 mm,而扇形束在所有骨骼上的平均误差为0.74±0.15 mm。研究结果表明,体素分辨率比扫描仪类型对脚骨建模更为关键,这些分割技术可能克服锥束扫描仪的局限性。这些结果支持了低剂量锥束负重计算机断层扫描成像在临床和研究中用于足部和踝关节骨三维建模的日益广泛的应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Medical Engineering & Physics
Medical Engineering & Physics 工程技术-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
4.50%
发文量
172
审稿时长
3.0 months
期刊介绍: Medical Engineering & Physics provides a forum for the publication of the latest developments in biomedical engineering, and reflects the essential multidisciplinary nature of the subject. The journal publishes in-depth critical reviews, scientific papers and technical notes. Our focus encompasses the application of the basic principles of physics and engineering to the development of medical devices and technology, with the ultimate aim of producing improvements in the quality of health care.Topics covered include biomechanics, biomaterials, mechanobiology, rehabilitation engineering, biomedical signal processing and medical device development. Medical Engineering & Physics aims to keep both engineers and clinicians abreast of the latest applications of technology to health care.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信