Vertebral morphometry: Semiautomatic determination of detailed shape from dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry images using active appearance models

Investigative Radiology

Volumn 41, Issue 12, 2006, Pages 849-859

  Roberts, Martin ^a   Cootes, Timothy F ^a   Adams, Judith E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Active appearance model; DXA; Osteoporosis; Segmentation; Vertebral fracture

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ANALYTICAL PARAMETERS; ARTICLE; AUTOANALYSIS; COMPUTER ANALYSIS; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; COMPUTER ASSISTED RADIOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DUAL ENERGY X RAY ABSORPTIOMETRY; FEMALE; FRAGILITY FRACTURE; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; INJURY SEVERITY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MORPHOMETRICS; NOISE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPINE RADIOGRAPHY; STATISTICAL MODEL; VERTEBRA; VERTEBRA FRACTURE;

EID: 33751003831     PISSN: 00209996     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.rli.0000244343.27431.26     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Melton LJ III, Atkinson EJ, Cooper C, et al. Vertebral fractures predict subsequent fractures. Osteoporosis Int. 1999;10:214-221.
2. Black DM, Arden NK, Palermo L, et al. Prevalent vertebral deformities predict hip fractures and new vertebral deformities but not wrist fractures. Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group. J Bone Miner Res. 1999;14:821-828.
3. Guermazi A, Mohr A, Grigorian M, et al. Identification of vertebral fractures in osteoporosis. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol. 2002;6:241-252.
4. Genant HK, Wu CY, van Kuijk C, et al. Vertebral fracture assessment using a semi-quantitative technique. J Bone Miner Res. 1993;8:1137-1148.
5. Black DM, Cummings SR, Stone K, et al. A new approach to defining normal vertebral dimensions. J Bone Miner Res. 1991;6:883-892.
6. Eastell R, Cedel SL, Wahner HW, et al. Classification of vertebral fractures. J Bone Miner Res. 1991;6:207-215.
7. McCloskey E, Spector T, Eyres K, et al. The assessment of vertebral deformity: a method for use in population studies and clinical trials. Osteoporosis Int. 1993;3:138-147.
8. Wu CY, Li J, Jergas M, et al. Semiquantitative and quantitative assessment of incident fractures: comparison of methods (Abstract). J Bone Miner Res. 1994;9(suppl 1):S157.
9. Black D, Palermo L, Nevitt MC, et al. Comparison of methods for defining prevalent vertebral deformities: the study of osteoporotic fractures. J Bone Miner Res. 1995;10:890-902.
10. Jiang G, Eastell R, Barrington NA, et al. Comparison of methods for the visual identification of prevalent vertebral fracture in osteoporosis. Osteoporosis Int. 2004;15:887-896.
11. Ferrar L, Jiang G, Adams J, et al. Identification of vertebral fractures: an update. Osteoporosis Int. 2005;16:717-728.
12. Bhargavan M, Sunshine JH, Schepps B. Too few radiologists? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;178:1075-1082.
13. Gregory JS, Testi D, Stewart A, et al. A method for assessment of the shape of the proximal femur and its relationship to osteoporotic hip fracture. Osteoporosis Int. 2004;15:5-11.
14. Smyth PP, Taylor CJ, Adams JE. Vertebral shape: automatic measurement with active shape models. Radiology. 1999;211:571-578.
15. Roberts MG, Cootes TF, Adams JE. Linking sequences of active appearance sub-models via constraints: an application in automated vertebral morphometry. Proceedings of the 14th British Machine Vision Conference. 2003;1:349-358.
16. Roberts MG, Cootes TF, Adams JE. Vertebral shape: automatic measurement with dynamically sequenced active appearance models. In: Proceedings of the 8th MICCAI Conference. 2005;2:733-740.
17. Zamora G, Sari-Sarraf H, Long R. Hierarchical segmentation of vertebrae from x-ray images. In: Proceedings of SPIE 2003, Med Imaging: Image Processing; 5032:631-642.
18. Howe B, Gururajan A, Sari-Sarraf H, et al. Hierarchical segmentation of cervical and lumbar vertebrae using a customized generalized hough transform and extensions to active appearance models. In: Proceedings of IEEE 6th SSIAI. 2004:182-186.
19. de Bruijne M, Nielsen M. Image segmentation by shape particle filtering. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Pattern Recognition. 2004:722-725.
20. Scott IM, Cootes TF, Taylor CJ. Improving active appearance model matching using local image structure. In: Proceedings of the 18th Conference on Information Processing in Medical Imaging. 2003:258-269.
21. Blake GM, Rea JA, Fogelman I. Vertebral morphometry studies using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. Semin Nucl Med. 1997;27:276-290.
22. Rea JA, Li J, Blake GM, et al. Visual assessment of vertebral deformity by x-ray absorptiometry: a highly predictive method to exclude vertebral deformity. Osteoporosis Int. 2000;11:660-668.
23. Binkley N, Krueger D, Gangnon R, et al. Lateral vertebral assessment: a valuable technique to detect clinically significant vertebral fractures. Osteoporos Int. 2005;16:1513-1518.
24. Ferrar L, Jiang G, Eastell R, et al. Visual identification of vertebral fractures in osteoporosis: using morphometric x-ray absorptiometry. J Bone Miner Res. 2003;18:933-938.
25. Chapurlat RD, Duboeuf F, Marion-Audibert HO, et al. Effectiveness of instant vertebral assessment to detect prevalent vertebral fracture. Osteoporosis Int. 2006;17:1189-1195.
26. Pavlov L, Gamble GD, Reid IR. Comparison of dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry and conventional radiography for the detection of vertebral fractures. J Clin Densitom. 2005;8:379-385.
27. McCloskey E, Selby P, de Takats D, et al. Effects of clodronate on vertebral fracture risk in osteoporosis: a 1-year interim analysis. Bone. 2001;28:310-315.
28. Cootes TF, Taylor CJ. Statistical models of appearance for medical image analysis and computer vision. In: Proceedings of SPIE 2001, Medical Imaging. 3:138-147.
29. Cootes TF, Edwards GJ, Taylor CJ. Active appearance models. In: Proceedings of the 5th European Conference on Computer Vision. 1998;2:484-498.
30. Cootes TF, Taylor CJ. Constrained active appearance models. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computer Vision. 2001;1:748-754.
31. Ferrar L, Jiang G, Eastell R. Short-term precision for morphometric x-ray absorptiometry. Osteoporosis Int. 2001;12:710-715.
32. Harvey SB, Hutchinson KM, Rennie EC, et al. Comparison of the precision of two vertebral morphometry programs for the Lunar Expert-XL imaging densitometer. Br J Radiol. 1998;71:388-398.
33. Gregory JS, Stewart A, Undrill PE, et al. Bone shape, structure, and density as determinants of osteoporotic hip fracture: a pilot study investigating the combination of risk factors. Invest Radiol. 2005;40:591-597.
34. Link TM, Bauer J, Kollstedt A, et al. Trabecular bone structure of the distal radius, the calcaneus, and the spine: which site predicts fracture status of the spine best? Invest Radiol. 2004;39:487-497.
35. Damilakis J, Maris T, Papadokostakis G, et al. Discriminatory ability of magnetic resonance T2* measurements in a sample of postmenopausal women with low-energy fractures: a comparison with phalangeal speed of sound and dual x-ray absorptiometry. Invest Radiol. 2004;39:706-712.