Cited by 12Medical Image Segmentation TechniquesMedical Imaging and AnalysisSpinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques

Deep Learning-Based X-ray Inpainting for Improving Spinal 2d-3d Registration

Esfandiari, Hooman, Weidert, Simon, Kövesházi, István, Anglin, Carolyn, Street, John, Hodgson, Antony J.·2021·The International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery

Abstract

Background Two-dimensional (2D)-3D registration is challenging in the presence of implant projections on intraoperative images, which can limit the registration capture range. Here, we investigate the use of deep-learning-based inpainting for removing implant projections from the X-rays to improve the registration performance. Methods We trained deep-learning-based inpainting models that can fill in the implant projections on X-rays. Clinical datasets were collected to evaluate the inpainting based on six image similarity measures. The effect of X-ray inpainting on capture range of 2D-3D registration was also evaluated. Results The X-ray inpainting significantly improved the similarity between the inpainted images and the ground truth. When applying inpainting before the 2D-3D registration process, we demonstrated significant recovery of the capture range by up to 85%. Conclusion Applying deep-learning-based inpainting on X-ray images masked by implants can markedly improve the capture range of the associated 2D-3D registration task.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/rcs.2228

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Studies may use different definitions of the same quantity, such as capture range defined using an SVM decision boundary versus mTRE.

    “In addition to the use of different metrics for validation purposes discussed above, studies may even use different definitions of the same quantity (such as the capture range, that is defined, e.g., using the decision boundary of an SVM classifier in (Esfandiari et al., 2021) and using mTRE in (Schaffert et al., 2020a).”

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 41 · Cited by 12

Authors
Esfandiari, H., Weidert, S., Kövesházi, I., Anglin, C., Street, J., & Hodgson, A. J.
Affiliations
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
  • Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
  • University of Calgary (CA)
Corresponding author
Esfandiari, Hooman
Venue
The International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2021-02-15
Volume
17
Issue
2
Pages
e2228-e2228
ISSN
  • 1478-5951 (ISSN-L)
  • 1478-596X
OpenAlex
W3126050797
Cited by
12
References
41
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1
FWCI
0.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research
  • Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Medical Image Segmentation Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Medical Imaging and Analysis
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Spinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Keywords
2D-3D registration, spinal imaging, capture range, intraoperative imaging, deep learning, image inpainting, image similarity measures
MeSH terms
Deep Learning, Algorithms, Humans, Spine, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, X-Rays, Imaging, Three-Dimensional

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review