Pioger Charles, Marin Laura, Gautier Yvon, Cléchet Julien, Imbert Pierre, Lutz Christian, Cavaignac Étienne, Sonnery-Cottet Bertrand
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery Ambroise Paré Hospital Boulogne-Billancourt France.
Laboratory AMIS, UMR 5288 CNRS Paul Sabatier University Toulouse France.
J Exp Orthop. 2025 Jul 18;12(3):e70361. doi: 10.1002/jeo2.70361. eCollection 2025 Jul.
To validate the accuracy of three-dimensional (3D) bone and cartilage reconstructions of the distal femur and proximal tibia derived from 1.5 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), using fully automated and semi-automated segmentation methods, compared to surface laser scanning (LS) as the reference standard.
Eleven fresh-frozen cadaveric knees were imaged using a 1.5 T MRI scanner. Manual (MS), fully automated (A), and semi-automated (SA) segmentations were performed to generate 3D models of the distal femur and proximal tibia. A transformer-based deep learning model (UNet-R) was used for automated segmentation. Laser surface scanning provided high-resolution ground-truth 3D models. Point-to-surface distances between MRI-based and LS-derived models were calculated to assess reconstruction accuracy. Bland-Altman analyses were performed to compare segmentation methods. Time to generate 3D models was recorded for each method.
The mean absolute point-to-surface distance for femoral models was 1.19 mm (±0.42) for MRI A, 1.05 mm (±0.09) for MRI SA, and 0.99 mm (±0.08) for MRI MS. For tibial models, the corresponding values were 1.54 mm (±1.02), 1.03 mm (±0.17), and 0.93 mm (±0.14), respectively. MRI A showed larger variability, which required manual correction. Time analysis revealed significant efficiency gains: 27 s for MRI A, 1520 s for MRI SA, and 14,191 s for MRI MS ( < 0.001). Bland-Altman plots confirmed improved agreement of MRI SA with MRI MS.
MRI-based 3D reconstructions of the knee using a 1.5 T system and semi-automated segmentation achieved sub-millimetre accuracy comparable to manual segmentation and significantly outperformed fully automated models in precision, while substantially reducing segmentation time. These findings support the integration of AI-assisted 3D reconstruction into preoperative planning workflows for knee ligament surgery, offering a reliable, radiation-free alternative to CT-based modelling.
Level IV, controlled laboratory study.
使用全自动和半自动分割方法,验证源自1.5特斯拉磁共振成像(MRI)的股骨远端和胫骨近端的三维(3D)骨骼和软骨重建的准确性,并与作为参考标准的表面激光扫描(LS)进行比较。
使用1.5 T MRI扫描仪对11个新鲜冷冻尸体膝关节进行成像。进行手动(MS)、全自动(A)和半自动(SA)分割,以生成股骨远端和胫骨近端的3D模型。基于变压器的深度学习模型(UNet-R)用于自动分割。激光表面扫描提供了高分辨率的真实3D模型。计算基于MRI的模型与基于LS的模型之间的点到面距离,以评估重建准确性。进行Bland-Altman分析以比较分割方法。记录每种方法生成3D模型的时间。
股骨模型的平均绝对点到面距离,MRI A为1.19毫米(±0.42),MRI SA为1.05毫米(±0.09),MRI MS为0.99毫米(±0.08)。对于胫骨模型,相应的值分别为1.54毫米(±1.02)、1.03毫米(±0.17)和0.93毫米(±0.14)。MRI A显示出较大的变异性,需要手动校正。时间分析显示效率有显著提高:MRI A为27秒,MRI SA为1520秒,MRI MS为14191秒(<0.001)。Bland-Altman图证实MRI SA与MRI MS的一致性有所改善。
使用1.5 T系统和半自动分割的基于MRI的膝关节3D重建达到了与手动分割相当的亚毫米精度,在精度上明显优于全自动模型,同时大大减少了分割时间。这些发现支持将人工智能辅助的3D重建整合到膝关节韧带手术的术前规划工作流程中,为基于CT的建模提供了一种可靠的、无辐射的替代方案。
IV级,对照实验室研究。