Elsevier

Spine Deformity

Volume 4, Issue 2, March 2016, Pages 98-103
Spine Deformity

Patient Evaluation
Multicenter Comparison of 3D Spinal Measurements Using Surface Topography With Those From Conventional Radiography

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspd.2015.08.008Get rights and content

Abstract

Introduction

In pediatric spinal deformity the gold standard for curve surveillance remains standing full-column radiographs, but repeated exposure to ionizing radiation motivates us to look for nonradiographic solutions. This study tests a modern system of surface topography (ST) to determine whether it is reliable and reproducible.

Methods

Patients from 6 pediatric spinal deformity clinics were recruited for enrollment. Inclusion criteria were age 8-18; diagnosis of scoliosis measuring ≥10 and <50 degrees or increased kyphosis of ≥45 degrees. Standing radiographs and ST scans (DIERS Formetric, Diers Medical Systems, Chicago, IL) were obtained on all patients and then measured and compared. A single investigator using a validated electronic measurement tool performed all radiographic measurements. Analysis of reproducibility and comparison of ST and radiographs were done.

Results

A total of 193 patients were enrolled (148 F [77%]). The mean age was 13.25 years (range 8–18). The scoliosis magnitude was as follows: thoracic average 22.7 ± 10 degrees; lumbar average 19.6 ± 9 degrees. The kyphosis magnitude was 54.0 ± 11 degrees. The reproducibility for each ST parameter for 3 repeated scans was strong (interclass correlation = 0.855–0.944). Comparison to radiographic measurements was strong in the thoracic (r = 0.7) and moderate in the lumbar curve (r = 0.5). There was an average difference of 5.8 degrees in the thoracic spine and 8.8 degrees in the lumbar spine between ST Cobb angle estimates and radiographs. Thoracic kyphosis also had a strong correlation (r = 0.8) with radiographs.

Conclusions

Although the results are intended to measure similar aspects of deformity as the traditional Cobb angle, the measurement is not intended to be an exact estimation. The utility of ST is in the reproducible quantification of deformity after the initial radiograph has been taken. This has the potential to make longitudinal assessment of change in deformity without serial radiographs.

Introduction

Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is a structural spinal deformity in the coronal plane that affects 1%–3% of children in the United States [1]. When the deformity is minor, less than 20°, treatment for this condition typically includes observation and surveillance to assess for curve progression [2]. Bracing and surgery are the treatments indicated for larger curves, though management in these patients also includes radiographic surveillance for evidence of a change in the deformity. The gold standard for diagnosis and subsequent curve surveillance remains standing full-column radiographs of the spine [3].

Radiographic images allows for assessment of the magnitude of the deformity in both the coronal and sagittal planes, and quantifying the spinal curvatures by deriving Cobb angle measurements. The disadvantage of radiographs, however, particularly in young patients, is that repeated exposure to ionizing radiation causes a significant increase in the risk of malignancies later in life [4], [5]. The relative risk of breast cancer, for example, is nearly four times greater in these patients [6]. Nash et al. reported in 1979 that the average teenage girl with scoliosis received 22 radiographs over 3 years of surveillance for AIS [7]. The frequency of radiographs has undoubtedly gone down since then, but there are no current studies measuring how many radiographs the average patient receives. The radiation dose for standard x-rays has also improved significantly over the years [8], but nonradiographic methods to image the spine and predict spinal deformity are still needed. Although no patient can avoid radiographs completely, there should be an effort to reduce radiation exposure whenever possible.

Surface topography (ST) has been used as an alternative to plain radiographs, beginning with the use of the inclinometer to measure the rotational deformity associated with scoliosis [9]. Many systems using surface topography have since been developed [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], but there has not yet been a system that has gained widespread acceptance, as prior research on ST has shown it to be inconsistent as a method of measuring spinal deformity [18]. The goal of this study was to test a modern system of surface topography measurement and to determine whether it was reliable and reproducible across multiple users. The correlation between ST-estimated curvature measurements and radiographic Cobb angles were compared to determine the suitability of ST as a replacement for some radiographs during AIS surveillance.

Section snippets

Methods

Patients treated for juvenile idiopathic scoliosis (JIS) or AIS from six North American institutions and one German institution were prospectively enrolled. Inclusion criteria for the analysis of the coronal plane deformity (CD) patients were as follows: age between 8 and 18 years with JIS or AIS measuring ≥10° and <50°. A second cohort of patients whose primary deformity was kyphotic (KD) were studied. Inclusion criteria for this group were defined as a sagittal Cobb angle measuring ≥45°.

Results

One hundred ninety-three patients were enrolled between 2012 and 2014. There were 170 that met the criteria for the coronal plane group (scoliosis >10 degrees), 29 that met the criteria for the sagittal plane group (kyphosis >45 degrees), and 6 that were in both groups. The demographics of each group are listed below in Table 1.

The reliability and comparison to x-ray for each ST parameter are represented in Table 2. The reproducibility for each ST parameter for 3 repeated scans was strong

Discussion

This multicenter study was conducted to test surface topography in the evaluation of spinal deformity. A similar paper by the lead author was done at a single site with a single examiner and had results that were almost identical [27]. This study utilized six different centers and multiple examiners, demonstrating the reproducibility of the Formetric surface topography scanner across many venues. The average standard deviation of repeated measurements of less than three degrees across all

References (28)

  • P.N. Soucacaos et al.

    Risk factors for idiopathic scoliosis: review of a 6-year prospective study

    Orthopedics

    (2000)
  • B.P. Yawn et al.

    The estimated cost of school scoliosis screening

    Spine (Phila Pa 1976)

    (2000)
  • V.J. Raso et al.

    Trunk distortion in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis

    J Pediatr Orthop

    (1998)
  • J.D. Boice

    Carcinogenesis—a synopsis of human experience with external exposure in medicine

    Health Phys

    (1988)
  • M. Morin Doody et al.

    Spine (Phila Pa 1976)

    (2000)
  • C.M. Ronckers et al.

    Cancer mortality among women frequently exposed to radiographic examinations for spinal disorders

    Radiat Res

    (2010)
  • C.L. Nash et al.

    Risks of exposure to X-rays in patients undergoing long-term treatment for scoliosis

    J Bone Joint Surg Am

    (1979)
  • W. Huda et al.

    Overview of patient dosimetry in diagnostic radiology in the USA for the past 50 years

    Med Phys

    (2008)
  • S.S. Upadhyay et al.

    Hump changes on forward flexion of the lumbar spine in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. A study using ISIS and the Scoliometer in two standard positions

    Spine (Phila Pa 1976)

    (1988)
  • J.D. Pearson et al.

    Measurement of body surface topography using an automated imaging system

    Acta Orthop Belg

    (1992)
  • M. Batouche et al.

    A computer vision system for diagnosing scoliosis using moiré images

    Comput Biol Med

    (1996)
  • N.J. Oxborrow

    Assessing the child with scoliosis: the role of surface topography

    Arch Dis Child

    (2000)
  • A.M. Macdonald et al.

    The effect of posture on Quantec measurements

    Stud Health Technol Inform

    (2002)
  • D.L. Hill et al.

    Evaluation of a laser scanner for surface topography

    Stud Health Technol Inform

    (2002)
  • Cited by (72)

    • Scoliosis assessment tools to reduce follow-up X-rays

      2023, Journal of Orthopaedic Translation
    • CT analysis of the posterior anatomical landmarks of the scoliotic spine

      2022, Clinical Radiology
      Citation Excerpt :

      Simony et al. described a five-times higher overall cancer rate in a Danish AIS population, as compared to age-matched controls.3 Several radiation-free imaging methods are available to measure the severity of the scoliosis, such as surface topography and ultrasound imaging.4–14 In this, surface topography has been studied for decades, but the asymmetry of the torso is influenced by spine shape, as well as the ribcage, trunk rotation, muscle volume, body fat, and posture.

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    Author disclosures: PK (grants from DIERS Medical Systems, outside the submitted work), PS (grants from DIERS Medical Systems, outside the submitted work), BL (reports grants from DIERS Medical Systems, personal fees from DePuy Synthes, personal fees from K2M, personal fees from Spine Search, personal fees from Paradigm Spine, grants from Setting Scoliosis Straight Foundation, grants from AO Spine, grants from John and Marcella Fox Fund, grants from OREF, other from SRS Spine Deformity Journal, outside the submitted work), PC (reports grants from DIERS Medical Systems, personal fees from DePuy Synthes Spine, personal fees from Ellipse Technologies, personal fees from Globus Medical, personal fees from Medtronic, outside the submitted work), MB (grants from DIERS Medical Systems, outside the submitted work), RM (grants from DIERS Medical Systems, outside the submitted work), MK (grants from DIERS Medical Systems, outside the submitted work), LL (grants from DePuy Synthes Spine, grants from DIERS Medical Systems, outside the submitted work; a patent 6,533,787 with royalties paid, a patent 6,830,571 with royalties paid, a patent 7,655,008 with royalties paid, a patent 7,670,358 with royalties paid, a patent 7,776,072 with royalties paid, a patent 8,727,972 with royalties paid, and a patent 8,361,121 with royalties paid; consultancy fees from DePuy Synthes Spine, K2M, Medtronic; travel reimbursement, “speakers bureaus,“ included in contracts; royalties from Medtronic, Quality Medical Publishing), RB (grants from DIERS Medical Systems, other from Advanced Vertebral Solutions, grants and personal fees from DePuy Synthes Spine, personal fees from Medtronic, other from Mimedx, other from Orthobond, personal fees and other from Abyrx, personal fees and other from SpineGuard, other from Medovex, personal fees from Zimmer, outside the submitted work).

    This research project was approved by the IRB committee at Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science, and then subsequently approved by cooperative agreement at each of the participating medical centers.

    1

    Formerly at Shriners Hospital for Children, 3551 N Broad St, Philadelphia, PA 19140, USA.

    2

    Formerly at Heinrich Heine University Hospital, Moorenstraße 5, Dusseldorf, 40225, Germany.

    3

    Formerly at Washington University Medical Center, 4901 Forest Park Ave, St. Louis, MO 63108, USA.

    View full text