Preoperative assessment and evaluation of instrumentation strategies for the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: computer simulation and optimization

Scoliosis

Hubert Labelle¹  Archana Sangole¹  Xiaoyu Wang²  Carl-Eric Aubin¹  Younes Majdouline¹ 

[1] Research Center, Sainte-Justine University Hospital Center of Universite de Montreal, 3175, Cote Sainte-Catherine Rd, Montréal, Québec H3T 1C5, Canada;Department of Mechanical Engineering, École Polytechnique, Universite de Montreal, P.O. Box 6079, Downtown Station, Montréal, Québec H3C 3A7, Canada

关键词: 3-D correction;    Optimization;    Modeling;    Simulation;    Instrumentation;    Scoliosis;   

Others  :  791422
DOI  :  10.1186/1748-7161-7-21

 received in 2012-08-16, accepted in 2012-11-09,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

A large variability in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) correction objectives and instrumentation strategies was documented. The hypothesis was that different correction objectives will lead to different instrumentation strategies. The objective of this study was to develop a numerical model to optimize the instrumentation configurations under given correction objectives.

Methods

Eleven surgeons from the Spinal Deformity Study Group independently provided their respective correction objectives for the same patient. For each surgeon, 702 surgical configurations were simulated to search for the most favourable one for his particular objectives. The influence of correction objectives on the resulting surgical strategies was then evaluated.

Results

Fusion levels (mean 11.2, SD 2.1), rod shapes, and implant patterns were significantly influenced by correction objectives (p < 0.05). Different surgeon-specified correction objectives produced different instrumentation strategies for the same patient.

Conclusions

Instrumentation configurations can be optimized with respect to a given set of correction objectives.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Majdouline et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Aubin CE, Labelle H, Ciolofan OC: Variability of spinal instrumentation configurations in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J 2007, 16:57-64.
• [2]Bjerkreim I, Steen H, Brox JI: Idiopathic scoliosis treated with Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation: evaluation 10 years after surgery. Spine 2007, 32:2103-2110.
• [3]Bridwell KH: Surgical treatment of idiopathic adolescent scoliosis. Spine 1999, 24:2607-2616.
• [4]Dubousset J, Cotrel Y: Application technique of Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation for scoliosis deformities. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1991, 264:103-110.
• [5]Suk SI, Lee SM, Chung ER, Kim JH, Kim WJ, Sohn HM: Determination of distal fusion level with segmental pedicle screw fixation in single thoracic idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 2003, 28:484-491.
• [6]Lenke LG, Betz RR, Haher TR, et al.: Multisurgeon assessment of surgical decision-making in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: curve classification, operative approach, and fusion levels. Spine 2001, 26:2347-2353.
• [7]Qiu G, Zhang J, Wang Y, et al.: A new operative classification of idiopathic scoliosis: a peking union medical college method. Spine 2005, 30:1419-1426.
• [8]Shufflebarger HL, Clark CE: Fusion levels and hook patterns in thoracic scoliosis with Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation. Spine 1990, 15:916-920.
• [9]Majdouline Y, Aubin CE, Robitaille M, Sarwark JF, Labelle H: Scoliosis correction objectives in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Pediatr Orthop 2007, 27:775-781.
• [10]Robitaille M, Aubin CE, Labelle H: Intra and interobserver variability of preoperative planning for surgical instrumentation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J 2007, 16:1604-1614.
• [11]O'Brien MF, Kuklo TR, Blanke RN, Lenke LG: Spinal Deformity Study Group Radiographic Measurement Manual. Memphis, TN: Medtronic Sofamor Danek; 2004.
• [12]Stokes IA, Bigalow LC, Moreland MS: Measurement of axial rotation of vertebrae in scoliosis. Spine 1986, 11:213-218.
• [13]Sangole AP, Aubin CE, Labelle H, et al.: Three-dimensional classification of thoracic scoliotic curves. Spine 2009, 34:91-99.
• [14]De Jonge T, Dubousset JF, Illes T: Sagittal plane correction in idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 2002, 27:754-760.
• [15]Lenke LG, Betz RR, Harms J, et al.: Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a new classification to determine extent of spinal arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2001, 83-A:1169-1181.
• [16]Majdouline Y, Aubin CE, Sangole A, Labelle H: Computer simulation for the optimization of instrumentation strategies in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Med Biol Eng Comput 2009, 47:1143-1154.
• [17]Zhang Y, Winker P, Dennis KJ: Uniform design: Theory and application. Technometrics 42(3). Alexandria, VA, United States: American Statistical Assoc; 2000:237-248.
• [18]Fang K-T, Ma C-X, Winker P: Centered L2-discrepancy of random sampling and Latin hypercube design, and construction of uniform designs. Math Comput 2002, 71(237):275-296. USA, American Math. Soc. Math. Comput. (USA)
• [19]Aubin CE, Labelle H, Chevrefils C, Desroches G, Clin J, Boivin A: Preoperative Planning Simulator for Spinal Deformity Surgeries. Spine 2008, 33(20):2143-2152.
• [20]Aubin CE, Petit Y, Stokes IA, Poulin F, Gardner-Morse M, Labelle H: Biomechanical modeling of posterior instrumentation of the scoliotic spine. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin 2003, 6:27-32.
• [21]Robitaille M, Aubin CE, Labelle H: Effects of alternative instrumentation strategies in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a biomechanical analysis. J Orthop Res 2009, 27:104-113.
• [22]Cheriet F, Laporte C, Kadoury S, Labelle H, Dansereau J: A novel system for the 3-D reconstruction of the human spine and rib cage from biplanar X-ray images. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2007, 54:1356-1358.
• [23]Aubin CE, Bellefleur C, Joncas J, et al.: Reliability and accuracy analysis of a new semiautomatic radiographic measurement software in adult scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2011, 36:E780-E790.
• [24]Delorme S, Petit Y, de Guise JA, Labelle H, Aubin CE, Dansereau J: Assessment of the 3-D reconstruction and high-resolution geometrical modeling of the human skeletal trunk from 2-D radiographic images. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2003, 50:989-998.
• [25]Labelle H, Dansereau J, Bellefleur C, Jequier JC: Variability of geometric measurements from three-dimensional reconstructions of scoliotic spines and rib cages. Eur Spine J 1995, 4:88-94.
• [26]Petit Y, Aubin CE, Labelle H: Patient-specific mechanical properties of a flexible multi-body model of the scoliotic spine. Med Biol Eng Comput 2004, 42:55-60.
• [27]Mathworks: Optimization Toolbox User's Guide. Natick, MA: The MathWorks Inc; 2001. [Version 2] http://www.mathworks.com webcite