Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Spine Journal 1/2018

01-02-2018 | Original Article

Self-learning computers for surgical planning and prediction of postoperative alignment

Authors: Renaud Lafage, Sébastien Pesenti, Virginie Lafage, Frank J. Schwab

Published in: European Spine Journal | Special Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

In past decades, the role of sagittal alignment has been widely demonstrated in the setting of spinal conditions. As several parameters can be affected, identifying the driver of the deformity is the cornerstone of a successful treatment approach. Despite the importance of restoring sagittal alignment for optimizing outcome, this task remains challenging. Self-learning computers and optimized algorithms are of great interest in spine surgery as in that they facilitate better planning and prediction of postoperative alignment. Nowadays, computer-assisted tools are part of surgeons’ daily practice; however, the use of such tools remains to be time-consuming.

Methods: Narrative review and results

Computer-assisted methods for the prediction of postoperative alignment consist of a three step analysis: identification of anatomical landmark, definition of alignment objectives, and simulation of surgery. Recently, complex rules for the prediction of alignment have been proposed. Even though this kind of work leads to more personalized objectives, the number of parameters involved renders it difficult for clinical use, stressing the importance of developing computer-assisted tools. The evolution of our current technology, including machine learning and other types of advanced algorithms, will provide powerful tools that could be useful in improving surgical outcomes and alignment prediction. These tools can combine different types of advanced technologies, such as image recognition and shape modeling, and using this technique, computer-assisted methods are able to predict spinal shape. The development of powerful computer-assisted methods involves the integration of several sources of information such as radiographic parameters (X-rays, MRI, CT scan, etc.), demographic information, and unusual non-osseous parameters (muscle quality, proprioception, gait analysis data). In using a larger set of data, these methods will aim to mimic what is actually done by spine surgeons, leading to real tailor-made solutions.

Conclusion

Integrating newer technology can change the current way of planning/simulating surgery. The use of powerful computer-assisted tools that are able to integrate several parameters and learn from experience can change the traditional way of selecting treatment pathways and counseling patients. However, there is still much work to be done to reach a desired level as noted in other orthopedic fields, such as hip surgery. Many of these tools already exist in non-medical fields and their adaptation to spine surgery is of considerable interest.
Literature
8.
go back to reference Camargo FP, Cordeiro EN, Napoli MM (1986) Corrective osteotomy of the spine in ankylosing spondylitis. Experience with 66 cases. Clin Orthop Relat Res 208:157–167 Camargo FP, Cordeiro EN, Napoli MM (1986) Corrective osteotomy of the spine in ankylosing spondylitis. Experience with 66 cases. Clin Orthop Relat Res 208:157–167
9.
go back to reference van Royen BJ, Slot GH (1995) Closing-wedge posterior osteotomy for ankylosing spondylitis. Partial corporectomy and transpedicular fixation in 22 cases. J Bone Joint Surg Br 77(1):117–121PubMed van Royen BJ, Slot GH (1995) Closing-wedge posterior osteotomy for ankylosing spondylitis. Partial corporectomy and transpedicular fixation in 22 cases. J Bone Joint Surg Br 77(1):117–121PubMed
10.
go back to reference Ondra SL, Marzouk S, Koski T, Silva F, Salehi S (2006) Mathematical calculation of pedicle subtraction osteotomy size to allow precision correction of fixed sagittal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31(25):973–979CrossRef Ondra SL, Marzouk S, Koski T, Silva F, Salehi S (2006) Mathematical calculation of pedicle subtraction osteotomy size to allow precision correction of fixed sagittal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31(25):973–979CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Shea KG, Stevens PM, Nelson M, Smith JT, Masters KS, Yandow S (1998) A comparison of manual versus computer-assisted radiographic measurement. Intra observer measurement variability for Cobb angles. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 23(5):551–555CrossRef Shea KG, Stevens PM, Nelson M, Smith JT, Masters KS, Yandow S (1998) A comparison of manual versus computer-assisted radiographic measurement. Intra observer measurement variability for Cobb angles. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 23(5):551–555CrossRef
21.
Metadata
Title
Self-learning computers for surgical planning and prediction of postoperative alignment
Authors
Renaud Lafage
Sébastien Pesenti
Virginie Lafage
Frank J. Schwab
Publication date
01-02-2018
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Spine Journal / Issue Special Issue 1/2018
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-018-5497-0

Other articles of this Special Issue 1/2018

European Spine Journal 1/2018 Go to the issue