Cell and Tissue Banking

, Volume 17, Issue 4, pp 699–711 | Cite as

Allograft selection for distal femur through cutting contour registration

  • Lei QiuEmail author
  • Yu Zhang
  • Qing Zhang
  • Lihui Xu
  • Xiaohui Niu
  • Li Zhang
Full Length Paper


Allograft reconstruction is an acceptable procedure for the recovery of normal anatomy after the bone tumor resection. During the past few years, several automated methods have been proposed to select the best anatomically matching allograft from the virtual donor bone bank. The surface-based automated method uses the contralateral healthy bone to obtain the normal surface shape of the diseased bone, which could achieve good matching of the defect and the selected allograft. However, the surface-based method focuses on the matching of the whole bone so that the matching of the contact surface between the allograft and the recipient bone may not be optimal. To deal with the above problem, we propose a cutting contour based method for the allograft selection. Cutting contour from the recipient bone could reflect the structural information of the defect and is seldom influenced by tumor. Thus the cutting contour can be used as the matching template to find the optimal alignment of the recipient bone and the allograft. The proposed method is validated using the data of distal femurs where bone transplantation is commonly performed. Experimental results show that the proposed method generally outperforms the surface-based method within modest extra time. Overall, our contour-based method is an effective complementary technique for allograft selection in the virtual bone bank.


Automated allograft selection Orthopedic oncology Contour extraction Contour registration Computer-aided surgery Patient specific instrument 



The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers and the editor for their suggestions on improving the quality of this article. This work is partly supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China with Grant Nos. 61172125 and 61132007, and is partly supported by the Joint Fund of Civil Aviation Research by National Natural Science Foundation of China and Civil Aviation Administration of China with Grant No. U1533132.


  1. Besl PJ, McKay ND (1992) A method for registration of 3-D shapes. IEEE trans pattern anal mach intell 14(2):239–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bou Sleiman H, Ritacco LE, Aponte-Tinao L, Muscolo DL, Nolte LP, Reyes M (2011) Allograft selection for transepiphyseal tumor resection around the knee using three-dimensional surface registration. Ann Biomed Eng 39(6):1720–1727CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bousleiman H, Paul L, Nolte LP, Reyes M (2013) Comparative evaluation of pelvic allograft selection methods. Ann Biomed Eng 41(5):931–938CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Campanacci D, Chacon S, Mondanelli N, Beltrami G, Scoccianti G, Caff G, Frenos F, Capanna R (2012) Pelvic massive allograft reconstruction after bone tumour resection. Int Orthop 36(12):2529–2536CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Cartiaux O, Paul L, Francq BG, Banse X, Docquier PL (2014) Improved accuracy with 3D planning and patient-specific instruments during simulated pelvic bone tumor surgery. Ann Biomed Eng 42(1):205–213CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen Y, Medioni G (1991) Object modeling by registration of multiple range images. In: IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, pp 2724–2729Google Scholar
  7. de Vet HCW, Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Hoekstra OS, Knol DL (2013) Clinicians are right not to like Cohen’s \(\kappa\). BMJ (Clinical research ed.) 346 (April), p f2125Google Scholar
  8. Geiger A, Lenz P, Urtasun R (2012) Are we ready for autonomous driving? the KITTI vision Benchmark suite. In: Conference on computer vision and pattern recognition (CVPR)Google Scholar
  9. Lehmann EL, D’Abrera HJM (2006) Nonparametrics: statistical methods based on ranks. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Makridis KG, Ahmad MA, Kanakaris NK, Fragkakis EM, Giannoudis PV (2012) Reconstruction of iliac crest with bovine cancellous allograft after bone graft harvest for symphysis pubis arthrodesis. Int Orthop 36(8):1701–1707CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Matejovsky Z, Kofranek I (2006) Massive allografts in tumour surgery. Int Orthop 30(6):478–483CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Muscolo DL, Ayerza MA, Aponte-Tinao LA (2000) Survivorship and radiographic analysis of knee osteoarticular allografts. Clin Orthop Relat Res 373:73–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Muscolo DL, Ayerza MA, Aponte-Tinao LA, Ranalletta M (2004a) Partial epiphyseal preservation and intercalary allograft reconstruction in high-grade metaphyseal osteosarcoma of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg 86(12):2686–2693CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Muscolo DL, Ayerza MA, Aponte-Tinao LA, Ranalletta M (2005) Use of distal femoral osteoarticular allografts in limb salvage surgery. J Bone Joint Surg 87(11):2449–2455PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Muscolo DL, Ayerza MA, Aponte-Tinao LA, Ranalletta M (2004b) Distal femur osteoarticular allograft reconstruction after grade III open fractures in pediatric patients. J Orthop Trauma 18(5):312–315CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Paul L, Docquier PL, Cartiaux O, Cornu O, Delloye C, Banse X (2008) Inaccuracy in selection of massive bone allograft using template comparison method. Cell Tissue Bank 9(2):83–90CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Paul L, Docquier PL, Cartiaux O, Cornu O, Delloye C, Banse X (2010) Selection of massive bone allografts using shape-matching 3-dimensional registration. Acta Orthop 81(2):250–255CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Ramseier LE, Malinin TI, Temple HT, Mnaymneh WA, Exner GU (2006) Allograft reconstruction for bone sarcoma of the tibia in the growing child. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 88(1):95–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ritacco LE, Espinoza OAA, Aponte-Tinao LA, Muscolo DL, de Quirós FG, Nozomu I (2009) Three-dimensional morphometric analysis of the distal femur: a validity method for allograft selection using a virtual bone bank. Stud Health Technol Inform 160(Pt 2):1287–1290Google Scholar
  20. Tryon WW, Lewis C (2008) An inferential confidence interval method of establishing statistical equivalence that corrects Tryon’s (2001) reduction factor. Psychol Methods 13(3):272–277CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Wongpakaran N, Wongpakaran T, Wedding D, Gwet KL (2013) A comparison of Cohen’s Kappa and Gwet’s AC1 when calculating inter-rater reliability coefficients: a study conducted with personality disorder samples. BMC Med Res Methodol 13:61CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. Wu Z, Fu J, Wang Z, Li X, Li J, Pei Y, Pei G, Li D, Guo Z, Fan H (2015) Three-dimensional virtual bone bank system for selecting massive bone allograft in orthopaedic oncology. Int Orthop 39(6):1151–1158CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lei Qiu
    • 1
    Email author
  • Yu Zhang
    • 1
  • Qing Zhang
    • 2
  • Lihui Xu
    • 2
  • Xiaohui Niu
    • 2
  • Li Zhang
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Electronic EngineeringTsinghua UniversityBeijingChina
  2. 2.Department of Orthopedic OncologyBeijing Jishuitan HospitalBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations