Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A multi-criteria decision support for optimal instrumentation in scoliosis spine surgery

  • Medical and Bioengineering Application
  • Published:
Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, the selection of an optimal instrumentation configuration for correcting a specific spinal deformity is a challenging combinatorial problem. Current methods mostly rely on surgeons’ expertise, which has been shown to lead to different treatment strategies for the same patients. In this work, a mathematical model of the human spine derived from in-vitro experimentally-obtained data was used to simulate the biomechanical behavior of the spine under the application of corrective forces and torques. The corrective forces and torques were optimized based on the particle swarm optimization algorithm for each combinatorially possible instrumentation strategy. Finally, a multi-criteria decision support for optimal instrumentation in scoliosis spine surgery has been proposed and applied to five patient data sets exhibiting similar spinal deformities according to two commonly used classification systems. Results indicated that the classification of the spinal deformities based on the current standardized clinical classifications systems is not a sufficient condition for recommending selective fusion of spinal motion segments. In addition, the particle swarm optimization algorithm was successfully applied to solve a realistic interdisciplinary clinical problem in a patient-specific fashion. The proposed method enables a better understanding of the biomechanical behavior of spinal structures and has the potential to become a standard tool in preoperative planning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aubin CE, Petit Y, Stokes IAF, Poulin F, Gardner-Morse M, Labelle H (2003) Biomechanical modeling of posterior instrumentation of the scoliotic spine. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng 6(1):27–32. ISSN 1025-5842

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bathe KJ (1996) Finite element procedures. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Bisshopp KE, Drucker DC (1945) Large deflection of cantilever beams. Q Appl Math 3(3): 272–275. ISSN 0033569X

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Bridwell KH (1999) Surgical treatment of idiopathic adolescent scoliosis. Spine 24(24):2607–2616

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheh G, Lenke LG, Lehman RA, Kim YJ, Nunley R, Bridwell KH (2007) The reliability of preoperative supine radiographs to predict the amount of curve flexibility in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 32(24):2668–2672

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheung KMC, Luk KDK (2011) Prediction of correction of scoliosis with use of the fulcrum bending prediction of correction of scoliosis with use of the fulcrum bending radiograph. J Bone Jt Surg 79:1144–1150

    Google Scholar 

  • Cobb JR (1948) Outline of the study of scoliosis. AAOS Instructional Lectures. Struct Multidisc Optim 5(5):261–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Dumas R, Lafage V, Lafon Y, Steib J-P, Mitton D, Skalli W (2005) Finite element simulation of spinal deformities correction by in situ contouring technique. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng 8(5):331–337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elias de Oliveira M, Hasler CC, Studer D, Schneider J, Büchler P (2011) A software tool for assessment of the spinal flexibility. In: Proceedings of the XXIII congress of the international society of biomechanics. Brussels, Belgium,

  • Gardner-Morse M, Stokes IA (1994) Three-dimensional simulations of the scoliosis derotation maneuver with Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation. J Biomech 27(2):177–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner-Morse MG, Laible JP, Stokes IA (1990) Incorporation of spinal flexibility measurements into finite element analysis. J Biomech Eng 112(4):481–483

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghista DN, Viviani GR, Subbaraj K, Lozada PJ, Srinivasan TM, Barnes G (1988) Biomechanical basis of optimal scoliosis surgical correction. J Biomech 21(2):77–88. ISSN 0021-9290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartley R, Zisserman A (2000) Multiple view geometry, vol 6. Cambridge University Press

  • Kennedy J, Eberhart R (1995) Particle swarm optimization. Opt Express 4:1942–1948. ISSN 10944087

    Google Scholar 

  • King HA, Moe JH, Bradford DS, Winter RB (2011) The selection of fusion levels in thoracic idiopathic scoliosis selection of fusion idiopathic levels scoliosis in thoracic. Surgery 65:1302–1313

    Google Scholar 

  • Klepps SJ, Lenke LG, Bridwell KH, Bassett GS, Whorton J (2001) Prospective comparison of flexibility radiographs in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 26(5):E74–E79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krismer M, Bauer R, Sterzinger W (1992) Scoliosis correction by Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation. The effect of derotation and three dimensional correction. Spine 17(8 Suppl):S263–S269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leborgne P, Skalli W, Lecire C, Dubousset J, Zeller R, Lavaste F (1999) Simulations of CD surgery on a personalized finite element model: preliminary results. In: Proceedings of the IRSSD, 28th June–1st July 1999

  • Lenke LG, Betz RR, Bridwell KH, Clements DH, Harms J, Lowe TG, Shufflebarger HL (1998a) Intraobserver and interobserver reliability of the classification of thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Bone Jt Surg 80(8):1097–1106

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenke LG, Betz RR, Bridwell KH, Clements DH, Harms J, Lowe TG, Shufflebarger HL (1998b) Intraobserver and interobserver reliability of the classification of thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Bone Jt Surg 80(8):1097–1106

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenke LG, Betz RR, Harms J, Bridwell KH, Clements DH, Lowe TG, Blanke K (2001) Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a new classification to determine extent of spinal arthrodesis. J Bone Jt Surg, Am Vol 83-A(8):1169–81. ISSN 0021-9355

    Google Scholar 

  • Luk KD, Cheung KM, Lu DS, Leong JC (1998) Assessment of scoliosis correction in relation to flexibility using the fulcrum bending correction index. Spine 23(21):2303–2307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogon M, Giesinger K, Behensky H, Wimmer C, Nogler M, Bach CM, Krismer M (2002) Interobserver and intraobserver reliability of Lenke’s new scoliosis classification system. Spine 27(8):858–862

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panjabi MM, Brand RA, White AA (1976) Three-dimensional flexibility and stiffness properties of the human thoracic spine. J Biomech 9(4):185–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petit Y, Aubin CE, Labelle H (2004) Patient-specific mechanical properties of a flexible multi-body model of the scoliotic spine. Med Biol Eng Comput 42(1):55–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polly DW, Sturm PF (1998) Traction versus supine side bending. Which technique best determines curve flexibility? Spine 23(7):804–808

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poulin F, Aubin CE, Stokes IA, Gardner-Morse M, Labelle H (1998) Biomechanical modeling of instrumentation for the scoliotic spine using flexible elements: a feasibility study. Ann Chir 52(8):761–767

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell MJD (1964) An efficient method for finding the minimum of a function of several variables without calculating derivatives. Comput J 7(2):155–162. doi:10.1093/comjnl/7.2.155

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Puno RM, An K-C, Puno RL, Jacob A, Chung S-S (2003) Treatment recommendations for idiopathic scoliosis: an assessment of the Lenke classification. Spine 28(18):2102–2114; discussion 2114–2115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robitaille M, Aubin CE, Labelle H (2007) Intra and interobserver variability of preoperative planning for surgical instrumentation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. European spine journal official publication of the European Spine Society the European Spinal Deformity Society and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society. Struct Multidisc Optim 16(10):1604–1614

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbrock HH (1960) An automatic method for finding the greatest or least value of a function. Comput J 3(3):175–184. doi:10.1093/comjnl/3.3.175. ISSN 00104620

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Shi Y, Eberhart R (1998) A modified particle swarm optimizer. Appl Math Comput 189(2):69–73. ISSN 15499596

    Google Scholar 

  • Stokes IAF, Gardner-Morse M (1999) Simulation of surgical maneuvers with C-D instrumentation. IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp 377–380

    Google Scholar 

  • Stokes IAF, Gardner-Morse M, Aubin CE, Labelle H (1999) Biomechanical simulations for planning of scoliosis surgery, three-dimensional analysis of spinal deformities, pp 343–346

  • Vanderby R, Daniele M, Patwardhan A, Bunch W (1986) A method for the identification of in-vivo segmental stiffness properties of the spine. J Biomech Eng 108(4):312–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaughan JJ, Winter RB, Lonstein JE (1996) Comparison of the use of supine bending and traction radiographs in the selection of the fusion area in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 21(21):2469–2473

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vedantam R, Lenke LG, Bridwell KH, Linville DL (2000) Comparison of push-prone and lateral-bending radiographs for predicting postoperative coronal alignment in thoracolumbar and lumbar scoliotic curves. Spine 25(1):76–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zienkiewicz OC, Taylor RL, Zhu JZ (2005) The finite element method: its basis and fundamentals. Butterworth-Heinemann

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge Prof. Dr. Raphael Haftka (Dept. of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering., University of Florida, USA) for many helpful comments and suggestions, kindness, and generosity. And a special thanks to the anonymous reviewers who provided thoughtful suggestions, which have enhanced the quality of this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut for Surgical Technology and Biomechanics, University of Bern, Stauffacherstr. 78, 3014, Bern, Switzerland

    Marcelo Elias de Oliveira, Guoyan Zheng & Philippe Büchler

  2. University Childrens Hospital beider Basel, UKBB, Spitalstrasse 33, 4056, Basel, Switzerland

    Carol-Claudius Hasler, Daniel Studer & Jacques Schneider

Authors
  1. Marcelo Elias de Oliveira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Carol-Claudius Hasler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Guoyan Zheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Daniel Studer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jacques Schneider
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Philippe Büchler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marcelo Elias de Oliveira.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Elias de Oliveira, M., Hasler, CC., Zheng, G. et al. A multi-criteria decision support for optimal instrumentation in scoliosis spine surgery. Struct Multidisc Optim 45, 917–929 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-011-0732-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-011-0732-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation