Cargando…

Comparison of Three 3D Segmentation Software Tools for Hip Surgical Planning

In hip arthroplasty, preoperative planning is fundamental to reaching a successful surgery. Nowadays, several software tools for computed tomography (CT) image processing are available. However, research studies comparing segmentation tools for hip surgery planning for patients affected by osteoarth...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mandolini, Marco, Brunzini, Agnese, Facco, Giulia, Mazzoli, Alida, Forcellese, Archimede, Gigante, Antonio
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9323631/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35890923
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s22145242
_version_ 1784756599906107392
author Mandolini, Marco
Brunzini, Agnese
Facco, Giulia
Mazzoli, Alida
Forcellese, Archimede
Gigante, Antonio
author_facet Mandolini, Marco
Brunzini, Agnese
Facco, Giulia
Mazzoli, Alida
Forcellese, Archimede
Gigante, Antonio
author_sort Mandolini, Marco
collection PubMed
description In hip arthroplasty, preoperative planning is fundamental to reaching a successful surgery. Nowadays, several software tools for computed tomography (CT) image processing are available. However, research studies comparing segmentation tools for hip surgery planning for patients affected by osteoarthritic diseases or osteoporotic fractures are still lacking. The present work compares three different software from the geometric, dimensional, and usability perspectives to identify the best three-dimensional (3D) modelling tool for the reconstruction of pathological femoral heads. Syngo.via Frontier (by Siemens Healthcare) is a medical image reading and post-processing software that allows low-skilled operators to produce prototypes. Materialise (by Mimics) is a commercial medical modelling software. 3D Slicer (by slicer.org) is an open-source development platform used in medical and biomedical fields. The 3D models reconstructed starting from the in vivo CT images of the pathological femoral head are compared with the geometries obtained from the laser scan of the in vitro bony specimens. The results show that Mimics and 3D Slicer are better for dimensional and geometric accuracy in the 3D reconstruction, while syngo.via Frontier is the easiest to use in the hospital setting.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9323631
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93236312022-07-27 Comparison of Three 3D Segmentation Software Tools for Hip Surgical Planning Mandolini, Marco Brunzini, Agnese Facco, Giulia Mazzoli, Alida Forcellese, Archimede Gigante, Antonio Sensors (Basel) Article In hip arthroplasty, preoperative planning is fundamental to reaching a successful surgery. Nowadays, several software tools for computed tomography (CT) image processing are available. However, research studies comparing segmentation tools for hip surgery planning for patients affected by osteoarthritic diseases or osteoporotic fractures are still lacking. The present work compares three different software from the geometric, dimensional, and usability perspectives to identify the best three-dimensional (3D) modelling tool for the reconstruction of pathological femoral heads. Syngo.via Frontier (by Siemens Healthcare) is a medical image reading and post-processing software that allows low-skilled operators to produce prototypes. Materialise (by Mimics) is a commercial medical modelling software. 3D Slicer (by slicer.org) is an open-source development platform used in medical and biomedical fields. The 3D models reconstructed starting from the in vivo CT images of the pathological femoral head are compared with the geometries obtained from the laser scan of the in vitro bony specimens. The results show that Mimics and 3D Slicer are better for dimensional and geometric accuracy in the 3D reconstruction, while syngo.via Frontier is the easiest to use in the hospital setting. MDPI 2022-07-13 /pmc/articles/PMC9323631/ /pubmed/35890923 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s22145242 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Mandolini, Marco
Brunzini, Agnese
Facco, Giulia
Mazzoli, Alida
Forcellese, Archimede
Gigante, Antonio
Comparison of Three 3D Segmentation Software Tools for Hip Surgical Planning
title Comparison of Three 3D Segmentation Software Tools for Hip Surgical Planning
title_full Comparison of Three 3D Segmentation Software Tools for Hip Surgical Planning
title_fullStr Comparison of Three 3D Segmentation Software Tools for Hip Surgical Planning
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Three 3D Segmentation Software Tools for Hip Surgical Planning
title_short Comparison of Three 3D Segmentation Software Tools for Hip Surgical Planning
title_sort comparison of three 3d segmentation software tools for hip surgical planning
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9323631/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35890923
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s22145242
work_keys_str_mv AT mandolinimarco comparisonofthree3dsegmentationsoftwaretoolsforhipsurgicalplanning
AT brunziniagnese comparisonofthree3dsegmentationsoftwaretoolsforhipsurgicalplanning
AT faccogiulia comparisonofthree3dsegmentationsoftwaretoolsforhipsurgicalplanning
AT mazzolialida comparisonofthree3dsegmentationsoftwaretoolsforhipsurgicalplanning
AT forcellesearchimede comparisonofthree3dsegmentationsoftwaretoolsforhipsurgicalplanning
AT giganteantonio comparisonofthree3dsegmentationsoftwaretoolsforhipsurgicalplanning