Abstract
Multibody models of scoliotic spine have shown great promise in planning scoliosis surgery by providing predictive information concerning the surgery outcome. To provide good predictive information, it is important that the kinematic models underlying the movement of the spine models would be personalized to give good estimates of the spine in different positions, which is lacking in the existing literature. This paper aims to develop a patient-specific multibody kinematic model of the scoliotic spine to represent its movement in frontal plane of the human body. The model is an open-chain mechanism comprising rigid links interconnected with rotary joints. To represent the movement, the mechanism lays on the spine curve and estimates the curve and the location and orientation of vertebrae. To personalize the mechanism for a patient, a minimization problem is defined to give the number of the links and their length by using X-rays of different spine positions. The feasibility and capabilities of our patient-specific model are tested by using the data from preoperative X-rays of five positions of 10 AIS (adolescent idiopathic scoliosis) patients; three of the X-rays are routine in scoliosis standard care. The mechanism is personalized to each patient by using the three routine X-rays, and it is used to estimate all the five positions. Root-mean-square-errors (RMSE) of the curve, location, and orientation are 2e–5 mm, 0.27 mm, and 0.25°, respectively. The small RMSEs imply that our kinematic model is capable of estimating the scoliotic spine positions in the frontal plane and thus of describing the scoliotic spine movement in this plane. Our personalization using X-rays of three spine positions helps to set better values for the kinematic parameters (such as the length of the links) for more accurate estimates of the spine in the frontal plane.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The examples are based on the measurements done on the X-rays of the scoliotic patients included in this study. The measurements and their accuracy and reliability are explained in Sect. 5.1.
The inflection vertebra is where the spine curve changes the direction from convex to concave and vice versa [38].
The vertebrae that define the ends of the spine curve in the frontal or sagittal planes [38].
References
Duke, K., Aubin, C.-E., Dansereau, J., Labelle, H.: Biomechanical simulations of scoliotic spine correction due to prone position and anaesthesia prior to surgical instrumentation. Clin. Biomech. 20(9), 923–931 (2005)
De Oliveira, M.E., Hasler, C.-C., Zheng, G., Studer, D., Schneider, J., Büchler, P.: A multi-criteria decision support for optimal instrumentation in scoliosis spine surgery. Struct. Multidiscip. Optim. 45(6), 917–929 (2012)
Aubin, C.E., Labelle, H., Chevrefils, C., Desroches, G., Clin, J., Eng, A.B.M.: Preoperative planning simulator for spinal deformity surgeries. Spine 33(20), 2143–2152 (2008)
Jalalian, A., Tay, F.E.H., Arastehfar, S., Liu, G.: A new method to approximate load–displacement relationships of spinal motion segments for patient-specific multi-body models of scoliotic spine. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. (2016). doi:10.1007/s11517-016-1576-8
Jalalian, A., Gibson, I., Tay, E.H.: Computational biomechanical modeling of scoliotic spine: challenges and opportunities. Spine Deform. 1(6), 401–411 (2013). doi:10.1016/j.jspd.2013.07.009
Panjabi, M.M.: Three-dimensional mathematical model of the human spine structure. J. Biomech. 6(6), 671–680 (1973). doi:10.1016/0021-9290(73)90023-7
Udoekwere, U.I., Krzak, J.J., Graf, A., Hassani, S., Tarima, S., Riordan, M., Sturm, P.F., Hammerberg, K.W., Gupta, P., Anissipour, A.K.: Effect of lowest instrumented vertebra on trunk mobility in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis undergoing a posterior spinal fusion. Spine Deform. 2(4), 291–300 (2014)
Christophy, M., Senan, N.A.F., Lotz, J.C., O’Reilly, O.M.: A musculoskeletal model for the lumbar spine. Biomech. Model. Mechanobiol. 11(1–2) 19–34 (2012)
White, A.A., Panjabi, M.M.: Clinical Biomechanics of the Spine, vol. 2. Lippincott, Philadelphia (1990)
Ishikawa, Y., Shimada, Y., Iwami, T., Kamada, K., Matsunaga, T., Misawa, A., Aizawa, T., Itoi, E.: Model simulation for restoration of trunk in complete paraplegia by functional electrical stimulation. In: Proceedings of IFESS05 Conference, Montreal, Canada (2005)
Monteiro, N.M.B., da Silva, M.P.T., Folgado, J.O.M.G., Melancia, J.P.L.: Structural analysis of the intervertebral discs adjacent to an interbody fusion using multibody dynamics and finite element cosimulation. Multibody Syst. Dyn. 25(2), 245–270 (2011)
Daggfeldt, K., Thorstensson, A.: The role of intra-abdominal pressure in spinal unloading. J. Biomech. 30(11), 1149–1155 (1997)
Stokes, I.A., Gardner-Morse, M.: Lumbar spine maximum efforts and muscle recruitment patterns predicted by a model with multijoint muscles and joints with stiffness. J. Biomech. 28(2), 173–186 (1995)
Huynh, K., Gibson, I., Jagdish, B., Lu, W.: Development and validation of a discretised multi-body spine model in LifeMOD for biodynamic behaviour simulation. Comput. Methods Biomech. Biomed. Eng. 18(2), 175–184 (2015)
De Zee, M., Hansen, L., Wong, C., Rasmussen, J., Simonsen, E.B.: A generic detailed rigid-body lumbar spine model. J. Biomech. 40(6), 1219–1227 (2007)
Petit, Y., Aubin, C.-E., Labelle, H.: Spinal shape changes resulting from scoliotic spine surgical instrumentation expressed as intervertebral rotations and centers of rotation. J. Biomech. 37(2), 173–180 (2004)
Christophy, M., Curtin, M., Senan, N.A.F., Lotz, J.C., O’Reilly, O.M.: On the modeling of the intervertebral joint in multibody models for the spine. Multibody Syst. Dyn. 30(4), 413–432 (2013)
Panjabi, M.M., Brand, R.A. Jr, White, A.A. III: Three-dimensional flexibility and stiffness properties of the human thoracic spine. J. Biomech. 9(4), 185–192 (1976)
Stokes, I.A., Gardner-Morse, M., Churchill, D., Laible, J.P.: Measurement of a spinal motion segment stiffness matrix. J. Biomech. 35(4), 517–521 (2002)
Aubin, C.-E., Petit, Y., Stokes, I., Poulin, F., Gardner-Morse, M., Labelle, H.: Biomechanical modeling of posterior instrumentation of the scoliotic spine. Comput. Methods Biomech. Biomed. Eng. 6(1), 27–32 (2003)
Abouhossein, A., Weisse, B., Ferguson, S.J.: A multibody modelling approach to determine load sharing between passive elements of the lumbar spine. Comput. Methods Biomech. Biomed. Eng. 14(06), 527–537 (2011)
Gardner-Morse, M., Stokes, I.A.: Three-dimensional simulations of the scoliosis derotation maneuver with Cotrel–Dubousset instrumentation. J. Biomech. 27(2), 177–181 (1994)
Petit, Y., Aubin, C., Labelle, H.: Patient-specific mechanical properties of a flexible multi-body model of the scoliotic spine. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. 42(1), 55–60 (2004)
Desroches, G., Aubin, C.-E., Sucato, D.J., Rivard, C.-H.: Simulation of an anterior spine instrumentation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using a flexible multi-body model. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. 45(8), 759–768 (2007)
Abedrabbo, G., Fisette, P., Absil, P.-A., Mahaudens, P., Detrembleur, C., Raison, M., Banse, X., Aubin, C.-E., Mousny, M.: A multibody-based approach to the computation of spine intervertebral motions in scoliotic patients. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 176, 95–98 (2011)
Raison, M., Aubin, C-É., Detrembleur, C., Fisette, P., Mahaudens, P., Samin, J.-C.: Quantification of global intervertebral torques during gait: comparison between two subjects with different scoliosis severities. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 158, 107–111 (2009)
Perret, C., Poiraudeau, S., Fermanian, J., Revel, M.: Pelvic mobility when bending forward in standing position: validity and reliability of 2 motion analysis devices. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 82(2), 221–226 (2001)
Wong, K.W., Leong, J.C., Chan, M-k., Luk, K.D., Lu, W.W.: The flexion–extension profile of lumbar spine in 100 healthy volunteers. Spine 29(15), 1636–1641 (2004)
Hresko, M.T., Mesiha, M., Richards, K., Zurakowski, D.: A comparison of methods for measuring spinal motion in female patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J. Pediatr. Orthop. 26(6), 758–763 (2006)
Amendt, L.E., Ause-Ellias, K.L., Eybers, J.L., Wadsworth, C.T., Nielsen, D.H., Weinstein, S.L.: Validity and reliability testing of the Scoliometer®. Phys. Ther. 70(2), 108–117 (1990)
Mior, S.A., Kopansky-Giles, D.R., Crowther, E.R., Wright, J.G.: A comparison of radiographic and electrogoniometric angles in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 21(13), 1549–1555 (1996)
Saur, P.M., Ensink, F.-B.M., Frese, K., Seeger, D., Hildebrandt, J.: Lumbar range of motion: reliability and validity of the inclinometer technique in the clinical measurement of trunk flexibility. Spine 21(11), 1332–1338 (1996)
Tousignant, M., Duclos, E., Laflèche, S., Mayer, A., Tousignant-Laflamme, Y., Brosseau, L., O’Sullivan, J.P.: Validity study for the cervical range of motion device used for lateral flexion in patients with neck pain. Spine 27(8), 812–817 (2002)
Reamy, B.V., Slakey, J.B.: Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: review and current concepts. Am. Fam. Phys. 64(1), 111–116 (2001)
Lonstein, J.: Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Lancet 344(8934), 1407–1412 (1994)
Tan, K.-J., Moe, M.M., Vaithinathan, R., Wong, H.-K.: Curve progression in idiopathic scoliosis: follow-up study to skeletal maturity. Spine 34(7), 697–700 (2009)
Cobb, J.: Outline for the study of scoliosis. Instr. Course Lect. 5, 261–275 (1948)
Lenke, L.: SRS Terminology Committee and Working Group on Spinal Classification Revised Glossary of Terms (2000). http://www.srs.org/professionals/glossary/SRS_revised_glossary_of_terms.htm. Accessed 21 July 2015
O’Brien, M.F., Kuklo, T.R., Blanke, K.M., Lenke, L.G.: Spinal Deformity Study Group Radiographic Measurement Manual. Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Memphis (2004)
Stokes, I.: Three-dimensional terminology of spinal deformity (1994). http://www.srs.org/professionals/glossary/SRS_3D_terminology.htm. Accessed 21 July 2015
Labelle, H., Aubin, C.-E., Jackson, R., Lenke, L., Newton, P., Parent, S.: Seeing the spine in 3D: how will it change what we do? J. Pediatr. Orthop. 31, S37–S45 (2011)
Bridwell, K.H., DeWald, R.L.: The Textbook of Spinal Surgery. Wolters Kluwer Health, New York (2012)
King, H.A., Moe, J.H., Bradford, D.S., Winter, R.B.: The selection of fusion levels in thoracic idiopathic scoliosis. J. Bone Jt. Surg., Am. Vol. 65(9), 1302–1313 (1983)
Cheh, G., Lenke, L.G., Lehman, R.A. Jr, Kim, Y.J., Nunley, R., Bridwell, K.H.: The reliability of preoperative supine radiographs to predict the amount of curve flexibility in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 32(24), 2668–2672 (2007)
Cheung, K., Luk, K.: Prediction of correction of scoliosis with use of the fulcrum bending radiograph∗. J. Bone Jt. Surg. 79(8), 1144–1150 (1997)
Polly, D.W. Jr, Sturm, P.F.: Traction versus supine side bending: which technique best determines curve flexibility? Spine 23(7), 804–808 (1998)
Vedantam, R., Lenke, L.G., Bridwell, K.H., Linville, D.L.: Comparison of push-prone and lateral-bending radiographs for predicting postoperative coronal alignment in thoracolumbar and lumbar scoliotic curves. Spine 25(1), 76 (2000)
Jeffries, B., Tarlton, M., De Smet, A.A., Dwyer, S. 3rd, Brower, A.C.: Computerized measurement and analysis of scoliosis: a more accurate representation of the shape of the curve. Radiology 134(2), 381–385 (1980)
Koreska, J., Smith, J.: Portable desktop computer-aided digitiser system for the analysis of spinal deformities. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. 20(6), 715–726 (1982)
Denavit, J.: A kinematic notation for lower-pair mechanisms based on matrices. J. Appl. Mech. 22, 215–221 (1955)
Colton, T.: Statistics in Medicine, vol. 164. Little, Brown, Boston (1974)
Razali, N.M., Wah, Y.B.: Power comparisons of Shapiro–Wilk, Kolmogorov–Smirnov, Lilliefors and Anderson–Darling tests. J. Stat. Model. Anal. 2(1), 21–33 (2011)
Anderson, T.W., Darling, D.A.: Asymptotic theory of certain “goodness of fit” criteria based on stochastic processes. Ann. Math. Stat. 23, 193–212 (1952)
Stokes, I.A., Bigalow, L.C., Moreland, M.S.: Three-dimensional spinal curvature in idiopathic scoliosis. J. Orthop. Res. 5(1), 102–113 (1987)
Oxland, T.R., Lin, R.M., Panjabi, M.M.: Three-dimensional mechanical properties of the thoracolumbar junction. J. Orthop. Res. 10(4), 573–580 (1992)
Jalalian, A., Tay, F.E.H., Arastehfar, S., Gibson, I., Liu, G.: Finding line of action of the force exerted on erect spine based on lateral bending test in personalization of scoliotic spine models. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. (2016). doi10.1007/s11517-016-1550-5
Jalalian, A., Tay, F.E.H., Liu, G.: A hypothesis about line of action of the force exerted on spine based on lateral bending test in personalized scoliotic spine models. In: The Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering International Congress, Kelowna, BC, Canada, June 26–29 (2016)
Lenke, L.G., Betz, R.R., Harms, J., Bridwell, K.H., Clements, D.H., Lowe, T.G., Blanke, K.: Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis a new classification to determine extent of spinal arthrodesis. J. Bone Jt. Surg. 83(8), 1169–1181 (2001)
Jalalian, A., Tay, F.E.H., Liu, G.: Data mining in medicine: relationship of scoliotic spine curvature to the movement sequence of lateral bending positions. In: 15th Industrial Conference on Data Mining ICDM 2016, New York, USA, 12–14 July (2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-41561-1_3
Sponseller, P.D., Flynn, J.M., Newton, P.O., Marks, M.C., Bastrom, T.P., Petcharaporn, M., McElroy, M.J., Lonner, B.S., Betz, R.R., Group, H.S.: The association of patient characteristics and spinal curve parameters with Lenke classification types. Spine 37(13), 1138–1141 (2012)
Boissonnat, J.-D., Teillaud, M.: Effective Computational Geometry for Curves and Surfaces, 1st edn. Mathematics and Visualization. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2006)
Sharpe, R.J., Thorne, R.W.: Numerical method for extracting an arc length parameterization from parametric curves. Comput. Aided Des. 14(2), 79–81 (1982). doi:10.1016/0010-4485(82)90171-3
Acharya, B., Acharya, M., Sahoo, S.: Numerical rectification of curves. Appl. Math. Sci. 8(17), 823–828 (2014)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Appendix
A 2D curve (\(y=f (z)\)) can be approximated by a polygonal chain (a piecewise linear curve or polyline [61]. The chain is obtained by connecting a finite number of points on the curve using line segments. The points (\(z,y\)) can be defined by segmentation of the \(z\)-axis, for example, \(z_{0}\), \(z_{0} +t\), \(z_{0} +2t, \ldots ,\mbox{ and }t\) is a real number and positive (Fig. 12a). Alternatively, the points can be specified by parameterization of the curve [62]. The parameterization by equal-length line segments (Fig. 12b) can be given by
where \(L_{\mathrm{seg}}\) is the length of the lines, and \(n\) is the total number of the lines.
Rectification gives the length (\(L\)) of a curve by adding up the length of the line segments [63]. For example, for the parameterized curve in Fig. 12b, the length (\(L\)) of the curve is \(n \cdot L_{\mathrm{seg}}\). Indeed, the rectification gives a good approximation of the curve length if \(L_{\mathrm{seg}}\) is sufficiently small. Thus, the parameterization of two curves of equal length (i.e. \(L_{1} =L_{2}\)) can result in the same number of the equal-length line segments (i.e. \(n_{1} =n_{2} \rightarrow L_{1} =n_{1} \cdot L_{\mathrm{seg}} = L_{2} =n_{2} \cdot L_{\mathrm{seg}}\)) if \(L_{\mathrm{seg}}\) is sufficiently small.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jalalian, A., Tay, F.E.H., Arastehfar, S. et al. A patient-specific multibody kinematic model for representation of the scoliotic spine movement in frontal plane of the human body. Multibody Syst Dyn 39, 197–220 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11044-016-9556-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11044-016-9556-1