European Spine Journal

, Volume 17, Issue 5, pp 663–672 | Cite as

A new system for measuring three-dimensional back shape in scoliosis

  • Fiona Berryman
  • Paul Pynsent
  • Jeremy Fairbank
  • Simon Disney
Original Article

Abstract

The aim of this work was to develop a low-cost automated system to measure the three-dimensional shape of the back in patients with scoliosis. The resulting system uses structured light to illuminate a patient’s back from an angle while a digital photograph is taken. The height of the surface is calculated using Fourier transform profilometry with an accuracy of ±1 mm. The surface is related to body axes using bony landmarks on the back that have been palpated and marked with small coloured stickers prior to photographing. Clinical parameters are calculated automatically and presented to the user on a monitor and as a printed report. All data are stored in a database. The database can be interrogated and successive measurements plotted for monitoring the deformity changes. The system developed uses inexpensive hardware and open source software. Accurate surface topography can help the clinician to measure spinal deformity at baseline and monitor changes over time. It can help the patients and their families to assess deformity. Above all it reduces the dependence on serial radiography and reduces radiation exposure when monitoring spinal deformity.

Keywords

Scoliosis Back shape Surface topography Non-invasive monitoring 

References

  1. 1.
    Adair I, VanWijk M, Armstrong G (1977) Moiré topography in scoliosis screening. Clin Orthop Relat Res 129:165–171PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Adam C, Izatt M, Harvey J, Askin G (2005) Variability in Cobb angle measurements using reformatted computerized tomography scans. Spine 30(14):1664–1669PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Berryman F (2004) Fourier transform profilometry for measuring back shape in scoliosis. PhD. School of Engineering and the Built Environment, University of Wolverhampton, WolverhamptonGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berryman F, Gardner A, Pynsent P, Fairbank J (2007) The relationship between Cobb angle and ISIS2 lateral asymmetry. In: Scoliosis Research Society eastern european regional meeting. Budapest, HungaryGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Berryman F, Pynsent P, Cubillo J (2004) The effect of windowing in Fourier transform profilometry applied to noisy images. Opt Lasers Eng 41(6):815–825CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bettany J, Harrison D (1992) The Stanmore footplate: an improved method in ISIS optical scanning. In: Alberti A, Drerup B, Hierholzer E (eds) Surface topography and spinal deformity. Gustav Fischer Verlag, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bunnell W (1984) An objective criterion for scoliosis screening. J Bone Joint Surg 66-A(9):1381–1387Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cobb J (1948) Outline for the study of scoliosis. Am Acad Orthop Surg Instr Course Lect 5:261–275Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Drerup B, Hierholzer E (1994) Back shape measurement using video rasterstereography and three-dimensional reconstruction of spinal shape. Clin Biomech 9:28–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Drerup B, Hierholzer E (1996) Assessment of scoliotic deformity from back shape asymmetry using an improved mathematical model. Clin Biomech 11(7):376–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Frobin W, Hierholzer E (1991) Video rasterstereography: a method for on-line measurement of body surfaces. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 57:1341–1345Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Goldberg C, Kaliszer M, Moore D, Fogarty E, Dowling F (2001) Surface topography, Cobb angles, and cosmetic change in scoliosis. Spine 26(4):E55–E63PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Grivas T, Karras G, Katrabasas J, Papavasiliou N (1997) Study of posterior trunk surface changes by age and sex using moiré topography. In: Sevastik J, Diab K (eds) Research into spinal deformities 1. IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp 331–334Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Groves D, Curran P (1992) An accurate, fast and cost effective method for the measurement of body shape and the assessment of spinal deformity. In: Alberti A, Drerup B, Hierholzer E (eds) Proceedings of the 6th international symposium on surface topography and spinal deformity. Gustav Fischer, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lamport L (1994) LaTeX—a documentation preparation system, 2nd edn. Addison Wesley, Reading, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Legaye J, Orban C, Lokietek W, Jacqumin N (1992) The ISIS optic scanner: its use in the evaluation and control of spinal deviations (in French). Acta Orthop Belg 58(Suppl 1):66–72PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Levy A, Goldberg M, Mayo A, Hanley J, Poitras B (1996) Reducing the lifetime risk of cancer from spinal radiographs among people with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 21(13):1540–1548PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lin J, Su X (1995) Two-dimensional Fourier transform profilometry for the automatic measurement of three-dimensional object shapes. Opt Eng 34(11):3297–3302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Morin Doody M, Lonstein J, Stovall M, Hacker D, Luckyanov N, Land C (2000) Breast cancer mortality after diagnostic radiography: findings from the U.S. Scoliosis Cohort Study. Spine 25(16):2052–2063PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Oxborrow N (2000) Assessing the child with scoliosis: the role of surface topography. Arch Dis Child 83:453–455PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pruijs J, Hageman M, Keesen W, Van Der Meer R, Van Wieringen J (1995) Spinal rotation meter: development and comparison of a new device. Acta Orthop Belg 61(2):107–112PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    R Development Core Team (2005) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, http://www.r-project.org
  23. 23.
    Rosenfeldt M, Harding I, Hauptfleisch J, Fairbank J (2005) A comparison of traditional protractor versus Oxford cobbometer radiographic measurement. Spine 30(4):440–443PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Su X, Chen W (2001) Fourier transform profilometry: a review. Opt Lasers Eng 35(5):263–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Takeda M, Mutoh K (1983) Fourier transform profilometry for the automatic measurement of 3-D object shapes. Appl Optics 22(24):3977–3982CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Theologis T, Fairbank J, Turner-Smith A, Pantazopoulos T (1997) Early detection of progression in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis by measurement of changes in back shape with the Integrated Shape Imaging System scanner. Spine 22(11):1223–1228PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Theologis T, Jefferson R, Simpson A, Turner-Smith A, Fairbank J (1993) Quantifying the cosmetic defect of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 18(7):909–912PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Turner-Smith A (1988) A television/computer three-dimensional surface shape measurement system. J Biomech 21(6):515–529PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Turner-Smith A, De Roguin B (1984) Lateral asymmetry index. Oxford Orthopaedic Engineering Centre, Oxford, pp 38–40Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Turner-Smith A, Harris J, Abery J, Osborne M (1981) The assessment of scoliosis. Oxford Orthopaedic Engineering Centre, Oxford, pp 41–47Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Turner-Smith A, Harris J, Houghton G, Jefferson R (1988) A method for analysis of back shape in scoliosis. J Biomech 21(6):497–509PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Turner-Smith A, Harris J, van Zuiden L, Smith H, Fidler C (1983) Analysis of back shape. Oxford Orthopaedic Engineering Centre, Oxford, pp 43–51Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Turner-Smith A, Roger R, Harris J (1980) Shape measurement and scoliosis. Oxford Orthopaedic Engineering Centre, Oxford, pp 39–58Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Weisz I, Jefferson R, Turner-Smith A, Houghton G, Harris J (1988) ISIS scanning: a useful assessment technique in the management of scoliosis. Spine 13(4):405–408PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fiona Berryman
    • 1
  • Paul Pynsent
    • 2
  • Jeremy Fairbank
    • 3
  • Simon Disney
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Engineering and the Built EnvironmentUniversity of WolverhamptonPriorslee, TelfordUK
  2. 2.Research and Teaching CentreRoyal Orthopaedic HospitalBirminghamUK
  3. 3.Nuffield Orthopaedic CentreOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations