Yuanjing Xu, L. Zhiyuan, Liu Yihao, Yang Zezheng, Keming Wan, Fei Liu, Jinwu Wang, K. Dai
{"title":"基于医学三维重建软件的三维骨重建精度评价","authors":"Yuanjing Xu, L. Zhiyuan, Liu Yihao, Yang Zezheng, Keming Wan, Fei Liu, Jinwu Wang, K. Dai","doi":"10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.1671-7600.2019.10.013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective \nTo investigate the feasibility of an accuracy evaluation method for 3D reconstructed bone model based on 3D reconstruction software Arigin3D Pro. \n \n \nMethods \nPig femurs were used as solid models which were scanned by CT and MRI respectively. The scan data were imported into software Arigin3D Pro for 3D model reconstruction by 3 operators with different reconstruction experience (≤1 year, 2 to 3 years, and ≥4 years, respectively). Each operator reconstructed the femurs 3 times and in each reconstruction measured the diameter of the femoral head, the length of the femur and the width of the knee joint at the distal end of the femur 3 times respectively using software Geomagic Wrap. The above parameters of the solid models were measured using a vernier caliper. The parameter values of reconstructed models and solid models were compared and the differences were analyzed. \n \n \nResults \nThe measurements by Geomagic Wrap showed deviations between the CT and MRI reconstruction models and the solid models, and the maximum deviation percentages were 1.47% and 1.08%, respectively. The percentages of intra-operater difference ranged from 0.29% to 1.53%; the 3D models reconstructed by operators with different reconstruction experience were not identical. \n \n \nConclusions \nIt is a feasible accuracy evaluation method to compare key parameters between the 3D bone model reconstructed by software Arigin3D Pro and the real animal bone. The deviations of 3D reconstructed bone model based on CT and MRI images are acceptable. The accuracy of 3D bone construction is related to the difference in operators. \n \n \nKey words: \nSkeleton; Software; Imaging, three-dimensional; Medical images; Accuracy","PeriodicalId":10145,"journal":{"name":"中华创伤骨科杂志","volume":"21 1","pages":"894-900"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accuracy evaluation for 3D bone reconstruction based on medical 3D reconstruction software\",\"authors\":\"Yuanjing Xu, L. Zhiyuan, Liu Yihao, Yang Zezheng, Keming Wan, Fei Liu, Jinwu Wang, K. Dai\",\"doi\":\"10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.1671-7600.2019.10.013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective \\nTo investigate the feasibility of an accuracy evaluation method for 3D reconstructed bone model based on 3D reconstruction software Arigin3D Pro. \\n \\n \\nMethods \\nPig femurs were used as solid models which were scanned by CT and MRI respectively. The scan data were imported into software Arigin3D Pro for 3D model reconstruction by 3 operators with different reconstruction experience (≤1 year, 2 to 3 years, and ≥4 years, respectively). Each operator reconstructed the femurs 3 times and in each reconstruction measured the diameter of the femoral head, the length of the femur and the width of the knee joint at the distal end of the femur 3 times respectively using software Geomagic Wrap. The above parameters of the solid models were measured using a vernier caliper. The parameter values of reconstructed models and solid models were compared and the differences were analyzed. \\n \\n \\nResults \\nThe measurements by Geomagic Wrap showed deviations between the CT and MRI reconstruction models and the solid models, and the maximum deviation percentages were 1.47% and 1.08%, respectively. The percentages of intra-operater difference ranged from 0.29% to 1.53%; the 3D models reconstructed by operators with different reconstruction experience were not identical. \\n \\n \\nConclusions \\nIt is a feasible accuracy evaluation method to compare key parameters between the 3D bone model reconstructed by software Arigin3D Pro and the real animal bone. The deviations of 3D reconstructed bone model based on CT and MRI images are acceptable. The accuracy of 3D bone construction is related to the difference in operators. \\n \\n \\nKey words: \\nSkeleton; Software; Imaging, three-dimensional; Medical images; Accuracy\",\"PeriodicalId\":10145,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"中华创伤骨科杂志\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"894-900\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"中华创伤骨科杂志\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.1671-7600.2019.10.013\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"中华创伤骨科杂志","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.1671-7600.2019.10.013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
Accuracy evaluation for 3D bone reconstruction based on medical 3D reconstruction software
Objective
To investigate the feasibility of an accuracy evaluation method for 3D reconstructed bone model based on 3D reconstruction software Arigin3D Pro.
Methods
Pig femurs were used as solid models which were scanned by CT and MRI respectively. The scan data were imported into software Arigin3D Pro for 3D model reconstruction by 3 operators with different reconstruction experience (≤1 year, 2 to 3 years, and ≥4 years, respectively). Each operator reconstructed the femurs 3 times and in each reconstruction measured the diameter of the femoral head, the length of the femur and the width of the knee joint at the distal end of the femur 3 times respectively using software Geomagic Wrap. The above parameters of the solid models were measured using a vernier caliper. The parameter values of reconstructed models and solid models were compared and the differences were analyzed.
Results
The measurements by Geomagic Wrap showed deviations between the CT and MRI reconstruction models and the solid models, and the maximum deviation percentages were 1.47% and 1.08%, respectively. The percentages of intra-operater difference ranged from 0.29% to 1.53%; the 3D models reconstructed by operators with different reconstruction experience were not identical.
Conclusions
It is a feasible accuracy evaluation method to compare key parameters between the 3D bone model reconstructed by software Arigin3D Pro and the real animal bone. The deviations of 3D reconstructed bone model based on CT and MRI images are acceptable. The accuracy of 3D bone construction is related to the difference in operators.
Key words:
Skeleton; Software; Imaging, three-dimensional; Medical images; Accuracy