nach oben

Skeletal Radiology

Erschienen in:

08.11.2021 | Scientific Article

Feasibility study of hallux valgus measurement with a deep convolutional neural network based on landmark detection

verfasst von: Tong Li, Yuzhao Wang, Yang Qu, Rongpeng Dong, Mingyang Kang, Jianwu Zhao

Erschienen in: Skeletal Radiology | Ausgabe 6/2022

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objective

To develop a deep learning algorithm based on automatic detection of landmarks that can be used to automatically calculate forefoot imaging parameters from radiographs and test its performance.

Materials and methods

A total of 1023 weight-bearing dorsoplantar (DP) radiographs were included. A total of 776 radiographs were used for training and verification of the model, and 247 radiographs were used for testing the performance of the model. The radiologists manually marked 18 landmarks on each image. By training our model to automatically label these landmarks, 4 imaging parameters commonly used for the diagnosis of hallux valgus could be measured, including the first–second intermetatarsal angle (IMA), hallux valgus angle (HVA), hallux interphalangeal angle (HIA), and distal metatarsal articular angle (DMAA). The reference standard was determined by the radiologists’ measurements. The percentage of correct key points (PCK), intragroup correlation coefficient (ICC), Pearson correlation coefficient (r), root mean square error (RMSE), and mean absolute error (MAE) between the predicted value of the model and the reference standard were calculated. The Bland–Altman plot shows the mean difference and 95% LoA.

Results

The PCK was 84–99% at the 3-mm threshold. The correlation between the observed and predicted values of the four angles was high (ICC: 0.89–0.96, r: 0.81–0.97, RMSE: 3.76–6.77, MAE: 3.22–5.52). However, there was a systematic error between the model predicted value and the reference standard (the mean difference ranged from − 3.00 to − 5.08°, and the standard deviation ranged from 2.25 to 4.47°).

Conclusion

Our model can accurately identify landmarks, but there is a certain amount of error in the angle measurement, which needs further improvement.

Piqué-Vidal C, Solé MT, Antich J. Hallux valgus inheritance: pedigree research in 350 patients with bunion deformity. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2007;46(3):149–54. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jfas.2006.10.011.CrossRefPubMed

Hecht PJ, Lin TJ. Hallux valgus. Med Clin North Am. 2014;98(2):227–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcna.2013.10.007.CrossRefPubMed

Perera AM, Mason L, Stephens MM. The pathogenesis of hallux valgus. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93(17):1650–61. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.H.01630.CrossRefPubMed

Smyth NA, Aiyer AA. Introduction: why are there so many different surgeries for hallux valgus? Foot Ankle Clin. 2018;23(2):171–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcl.2018.01.001.CrossRefPubMed

Galois L. History of surgical treatments for hallux valgus. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2018;28(8):1633–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-018-2235-6.CrossRefPubMed

Shi GG, Whalen JL, Turner NS 3rd, Kitaoka HB. Operative approach to adult hallux valgus deformity: principles and techniques. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2020;28(10):410–8. https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOS-D-19-00324.CrossRefPubMed

Fraissler L, Konrads C, Hoberg M, Rudert M, Walcher M. Treatment of hallux valgus deformity. EFORT Open Rev. 2016;1(8):295–302. https://doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.1.000005.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Coughlin MJ, Freund E. Roger A. Mann Award. The reliability of angular measurements in hallux valgus deformities. Foot Ankle Int. 2001;22(5):369–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/107110070102200503.CrossRefPubMed

Resch S, Ryd L, Stenström A, Johnsson K, Reynisson K. Measuring hallux valgus: a comparison of conventional radiography and clinical parameters with regard to measurement accuracy. Foot Ankle Int. 1995;16(5):267–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/107110079501600504.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Lamm BM, Stasko PA, Gesheff MG, Bhave A. Normal foot and ankle radiographic angles, measurements, and reference points. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2016;55(5):991–8. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jfas.2016.05.005.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Steel MW 3rd, Johnson KA, DeWitz MA, Ilstrup DM. Radiographic measurements of the normal adult foot. Foot Ankle. 1980;1(3):151–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/107110078000100304.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Vittetoe DA, Saltzman CL, Krieg JC, Brown TD. Validity and reliability of the first distal metatarsal articular angle. Foot Ankle Int. 1994;15(10):541–7. https://doi.org/10.1177/107110079401501004.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Torosdagli N, Liberton DK, Verma P, Sincan M, Lee JS, Bagci U. Deep geodesic learning for segmentation and anatomical landmarking. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2019;38(4):919–31. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMI.2018.2875814.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Ibtehaz N, Rahman MS. MultiResUNet : rethinking the U-Net architecture for multimodal biomedical image segmentation. Neural Netw. 2020;121:74–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neunet.2019.08.025.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Ronneberger O, Fischer P, Brox T. U-Net: convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation[J]. Springer International Publishing; 2015.

16.

Xiao B , Wu H , Wei Y . Simple baselines for human pose estimation and tracking[C]// ECCV. arXiv, 2018.

17.

Hosny A, Parmar C, Quackenbush J, Schwartz LH, Aerts HJWL. Artificial intelligence in radiology. Nat Rev Cancer. 2018;18(8):500–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41568-018-0016-5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Yasaka K, Abe O. Deep learning and artificial intelligence in radiology: current applications and future directions. PLoS Med. 2018;15(11):e1002707. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002707.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Larson DB, Chen MC, Lungren MP, Halabi SS, Stence NV, Langlotz CP. Performance of a deep-learning neural network model in assessing skeletal maturity on pediatric hand radiographs. Radiology. 2018;287(1):313–22. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2017170236.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Tomita N, Cheung YY, Hassanpour S. Deep neural networks for automatic detection of osteoporotic vertebral fractures on CT scans. Comput Biol Med. 2018;1(98):8–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2018.05.011.CrossRef

21.

Kim DH, MacKinnon T. Artificial intelligence in fracture detection: transfer learning from deep convolutional neural networks. Clin Radiol. 2018;73(5):439–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2017.11.015.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Lindsey R, Daluiski A, Chopra S, Lachapelle A, Mozer M, Sicular S, Hanel D, Gardner M, Gupta A, Hotchkiss R, Potter H. Deep neural network improves fracture detection by clinicians. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018;115(45):11591–6. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1806905115.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

23.

Couteaux V, Si-Mohamed S, Nempont O, Lefevre T, Popoff A, Pizaine G, Villain N, Bloch I, Cotten A, Boussel L. Automatic knee meniscus tear detection and orientation classification with Mask-RCNN. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2019;100(4):235–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diii.2019.03.002.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Roblot V, Giret Y, Bou Antoun M, Morillot C, Chassin X, Cotten A, Zerbib J, Fournier L. Artificial intelligence to diagnose meniscus tears on MRI. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2019;100(4):243–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diii.2019.02.007.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Liu F, Zhou Z, Samsonov A, Blankenbaker D, Larison W, Kanarek A, Lian K, Kambhampati S, Kijowski R. Deep learning approach for evaluating knee MR images: achieving high diagnostic performance for cartilage lesion detection. Radiology. 2018;289(1):160–9. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2018172986.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Wang CW, Huang CT, Hsieh MC, Li CH, Chang SW, Li WC, Vandaele R, Marée R, Jodogne S, Geurts P, Chen C, Zheng G, Chu C, Mirzaalian H, Hamarneh G, Vrtovec T, Ibragimov B. Evaluation and comparison of anatomical landmark detection methods for cephalometric X-ray images: a grand challenge. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2015;34(9):1890–900. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMI.2015.2412951.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Cardillo J, Sid-Ahmed MA. An image processing system for locating craniofacial landmarks. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 1994;13(2):275–89. https://doi.org/10.1109/42.293920.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Esteva A, Robicquet A, Ramsundar B, Kuleshov V, DePristo M, Chou K, Cui C, Corrado G, Thrun S, Dean J. A guide to deep learning in healthcare. Nat Med. 2019;25(1):24–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-018-0316-z.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Miotto R, Wang F, Wang S, Jiang X, Dudley JT. Deep learning for healthcare: review, opportunities and challenges. Brief Bioinform. 2018;19(6):1236–46. https://doi.org/10.1093/bib/bbx044.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Chan HP, Samala RK, Hadjiiski LM, Zhou C. Deep learning in medical image analysis. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2020;1213:3–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33128-3_1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

31.

Day J, de Cesar NC, Richter M, Mansur NS, Fernando C, Deland JT, Ellis SJ, Lintz F. Evaluation of a weightbearing CT artificial intelligence-based automatic measurement for the M1–M2 intermetatarsal angle in hallux valgus. Foot Ankle Int. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1177/10711007211015177.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Cassar-Pullicino VN. Measurements in musculoskeletal radiology. Springer Verlag Ny; 2017.

33.

Dai J, Qi H, Xiong Y, et al. Deformable convolutional networks[J]. IEEE, 2017.

34.

Rectified linear units improve restricted Boltzmann machines Vinod Nair[C]// International Conference on International Conference on Machine Learning. Omnipress, 2010.

35.

Payer C, Tern D, Bischof H, et al. Integrating spatial configuration into heatmap regression based CNNs for landmark localization[J]. Med Image Anal. 2019.

36.

Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med. 2016;15(2):155–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012 (Epub 2016 Mar 31. Erratum in: J Chiropr Med. 2017 Dec;16(4):346).CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

37.

Schober P, Boer C, Schwarte LA. Correlation coefficients: appropriate use and interpretation. Anesth Analg. 2018;126(5):1763–8. https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000002864.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Dong Y, Zhang S, Yan Z, Tan C, Metaxas D. . . Automated anatomical landmark detection on distal femur surface using convolutional neural network. 2015 IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging. IEEE. 2015.

39.

Liu W, Wang Y, Jiang T, et al. Landmarks detection with anatomical constraints for total hip arthroplasty preoperative measurements[C]//International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention. Springer, Cham, 2020: 670-679

40.

Yang W, Ye Q, Ming S, Hu X, Jiang Z, Shen Q, He L, Gong X. Feasibility of automatic measurements of hip joints based on pelvic radiography and a deep learning algorithm. Eur J Radiol. 2020;132:109303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.109303.CrossRefPubMed

41.

Ye Q, Shen Q, Yang W, Huang S, Jiang Z, He L, Gong X. Development of automatic measurement for patellar height based on deep learning and knee radiographs. Eur Radiol. 2020;30(9):4974–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06856-z.CrossRefPubMed

42.

Zhang SC, Sun J, Liu CB, Fang JH, Xie HT, Ning B. Clinical application of artificial intelligence-assisted diagnosis using anteroposterior pelvic radiographs in children with developmental dysplasia of the hip. Bone Joint J. 2020;102-B(11):1574–81. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.102B11.BJJ-2020-0712.R2.CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Feasibility study of hallux valgus measurement with a deep convolutional neural network based on landmark detection
verfasst von: Tong Li
Yuzhao Wang
Yang Qu
Rongpeng Dong
Mingyang Kang
Jianwu Zhao
Publikationsdatum: 08.11.2021
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: Skeletal Radiology / Ausgabe 6/2022
Print ISSN: 0364-2348
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-2161
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-021-03939-w

Test Yourself Answer: A 36-year-old male presenting with a painful swollen right thigh for several months—no previous history of trauma

Test Yourself: Answer

A new radiological index for the assessment of higher body fat status and lumbar spine degeneration

Scientific Article

Diagnosis, imaging, and potential morbidities of the hallux interphalangeal joint os interphalangeus

Review Article

Low-velocity, civilian firearm extremity injuries—review and update for radiologists

Review Article

Imaging of progressive collapsing foot deformity with emphasis on the role of weightbearing cone beam CT

Review Article

Medial collateral ligament injury of the knee: correlations between MRI features and clinical gradings

Scientific Article

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

Ringen um den richtigen Umgang mit Zufallsbefunden

24.04.2025
DGP 2025
Kongressbericht

Wenn 2026 in Deutschland das Lungenkrebsscreening mittels Low-Dose-Computertomografie (LDCT) eingeführt wird, wird es auch viele Zufallsbefunde ans Licht bringen. Das birgt Chancen und Risiken.

Bald 5% der Krebserkrankungen durch CT verursacht

23.04.2025
Computertomografie
Nachrichten

Die jährlich rund 93 Millionen CTs in den USA könnten künftig zu über 100.000 zusätzlichen Krebserkrankungen führen, geht aus einer Modellrechnung hervor. Damit würde eine von 20 Krebserkrankungen auf die ionisierende Strahlung bei CT-Untersuchungen zurückgehen.

Röntgen-Thorax oder LDCT fürs Lungenscreening nach HNSCC?

06.04.2025
Kopf-Hals-Tumoren
Nachrichten

Personen, die an einem Plattenepithelkarzinom im Kopf-Hals-Bereich erkrankt sind, haben ein erhöhtes Risiko für Metastasen oder zweite Primärmalignome der Lunge. Eine Studie hat untersucht, wie die radiologische Überwachung aussehen sollte.

Statine: Was der G-BA-Beschluss für Praxen bedeutet

06.04.2025
Praxis und Beruf
Nachrichten

Nach dem G-BA-Beschluss zur erweiterten Verordnungsfähigkeit von Lipidsenkern rechnet die DEGAM mit 200 bis 300 neuen Dauerpatienten pro Praxis. Im Interview erläutert Präsidiumsmitglied Erika Baum, wie Hausärztinnen und Hausärzte am besten vorgehen.

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Feasibility study of hallux valgus measurement with a deep convolutional neural network based on landmark detection