MRI vs CT-based 2D-3D auto-registration accuracy for quantifying shoulder motion using biplane video-radiography

Abstract

Biplane 2D-3D registration approaches have been used for measuring 3D, in vivo glenohumeral (GH) joint kinematics. Computed tomography (CT) has become the gold standard for reconstructing 3D bone models, as it provides high geometric accuracy and similar tissue contrast to fluoroscopy. Alternatively, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) would not expose subjects to radiation and provides the ability to add cartilage and other soft tissues to the models. However, the accuracy of MRI-based 2D-3D registration for quantifying glenohumeral kinematics is unknown. We developed an automatic 2D-3D registration program that works with both CT- and MRI-based image volumes for quantifying joint motions. The purpose of this study was to use the proposed 2D-3D auto-registration algorithm to describe the humerus and scapula tracking accuracy of CT- and MRI-based registration relative to radiostereometric analysis (RSA) during dynamic biplanar fluoroscopy. The GH kinematic accuracy (RMS error) was 0.6–1.0 mm and 0.6–2.2° for the CT-based registration and 1.4–2.2 mm and 1.2–2.6° for MRI-based registration. Higher kinematic accuracy of CT-based registration was expected as MRI provides lower spatial resolution and bone contrast as compared to CT and suffers from spatial distortions. However, the MRI-based registration is within an acceptable accuracy for many clinical research questions.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Versus Computed Tomography for Three‐Dimensional Bone Imaging of Musculoskeletal Pathologies: A Review

“…Fusion of MRI with radiography has also been performed for kinematic analysis. 41,46 Is one sequence better than the other? VS-GRE and ZTE sequences seemed to stand out with validation in multiple anatomies, owing to their rather fast acquisition offering isotropic images with good cortical bone-to-bone marrow and cortical bone-to-muscles contrasts that facilitate bone segmentation.…”

Shoulder mechanical impingement risk associated with manual wheelchair tasks in individuals with spinal cord injury

“…Six degree-of-freedom kinematics of the humerus and scapula were determined by registration of the CT bone models to consecutive fluoroscopic image pairs using custom model-based tracking software (software described by Akbari-Shandiz et al, 2019), and Autoscoper software (Miranda et al, 2011) was used for further refinement of model position. Average glenohumeral angular speeds [°/s] (measured from model-based tracking) were 31 (SD 7.5) (scaption), 55 (SD 5.5) (propulsion), 25 (SD 10.3) (sideways lean), and 27 (SD 8.6) (weight-relief raise) and are estimated to add 0.4 -0.81 mm and 0.15 -0.26° error in glenohumeral kinematic measures based on a previous validation study (Mozingo et al, 2018).…”

The Impact of Decreased Scapulothoracic Upward Rotation on Subacromial Proximities

“…Shoulder magnetic resonance scans were acquired using a 3-T scanner (MAGNETOM Prisma; Siemens AG, Munich, Germany) and shoulder coil array, as previously described. 1 The scan field of view included the entire scapula and proximal humerus.…”

“…The purpose of the current study was to determine the impact of decreased scapulothoracic upward rotation on subacromial proximities during arm elevation in the scapular plane. In this study, the term subacromial proximities is used to collectively describe 2 primary outcome measures: (1) the normalized minimum distance between the coracoacromial arch and humeral rotator cuff insertion, and (2) the surface area of the humeral rotator cuff insertion in immediate proximity to the coracoacromial arch (ie, subacromial proximity area). It was hypothesized that, compared to participants classified as having high scapulothoracic upward rotation, participants classified as having low scapulothoracic upward rotation would have significantly decreased normalized minimum distance and increased subacromial proximity area below 60° of humerothoracic elevation.…”