The Comparison of Convolutional Neural Networks and the Manual Measurement of Cobb Angle in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis

• Published in: Global spine journal Vol. 14; no. 1; pp. 159 - 168
• Main Authors: Huang, Xianming, Luo, Ming, Liu, Limin, Wu, Diwei, You, Xuanhe, Deng, Zhipeng, Xiu, Peng, Yang, Xi, Zhou, Chunguang, Feng, Ganjun, Wang, Lei, Zhou, Zhongjie, Fan, Jipeng, He, Mingjie, Gao, Zhongjun, Pu, Lixin, Wu, Zhihong, Zhou, Zongke, Song, Yueming, Huang, Shishu
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 01.01.2024; Sage Publications Ltd
• Subjects: Automation; Scoliosis; automated measurement; cobb angle; convolutional neural networks; adolescent idiopathic scoliosis
• ISSN: 2192-5682; 2192-5690
• DOI: 10.1177/21925682221098672

Study Design Comparative study Objective To compare manual and deep learning-based automated measurement of Cobb angle in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Methods We proposed a fully automated framework to measure the Cobb angle of AIS patients. Whole-spine images of 500 AIS individuals were collected. 200 digital radiographic (DR) images were labeled manually as training set, and the remaining 300 images were used to validate by mean absolute error (MAE), Pearson or spearman correlation coefficients, and intra/interclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). The relationship between accuracy of vertebral boundary identification and the subjective image quality score was evaluated. Results The PT, MT, and TL/L Cobb angles were measured by the automated framework within 300 milliseconds. Remarkable 2.92° MAE, .967 ICC, and high correlation coefficient (r = .972) were obtained for the major curve. The MAEs of PT, MT, and TL/L were 3.04°, 2.72°, and 2.53°, respectively. The ICCs of these 3 curves were .936, .977, and .964, respectively. 88.7% (266/300) of cases had a difference range of ±5°, with 84.3% (253/300) for PT, 89.7% (269/300) for MT, and 93.0% (279/300) for TL/L. The decreased bone/soft tissue contrast (2.94 vs 3.26; P=.039) and bone sharpness (2.97 vs 3.35; P=.029) were identified in the images with MAE exceeding 5°. Conclusion The fully automated framework not only identifies the vertebral boundaries, vertebral sequences, the upper/lower end vertebras and apical vertebra, but also calculates the Cobb angle of PT, MT, and TL/L curves sequentially. The framework would shed new light on the assessment of AIS curvature.