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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |