Journal of Medical Systems

, Volume 3, Issue 1–2, pp 81–94 | Cite as

Automated nerve fiber counting using an array processor in a Multi-Mini Computer System

  • Gary K. Frykman
  • Harold G. Rutherford
  • Ivan R. Neilsen


It has been suggested that recovery of motor and sensory function in the site distal to a peripheral nerve lesion should be improved if the nerve bundles (fasciculi) are matched and individually sutured. Three parameters are proposed to provide quantitative data: the count of the nerve fibers that regenerate, the number of functional regenerated nerve fibers, and a measurement of end organ reinnervation. A thin cross section of a transected and repaired sciatic nerve of a mongrel cat is fixed, stained, photographed, and digitized through a microscope 6 months following nerve repair. The data arrays are then subjected to four basic processing routines: edge enhancing, thresholding, template matching, and peak detection. Finally, the peaks are counted and provide an estimate of the number of nerve fibers in the nerve under study. Comparing counts of nerve fibers proximal and distal to the transection site of the nerve provide data on the proportion of regeneration present at various times. The content of this paper is, to a large extent, describing the implementation of the needed image-processing algorithms for automated counting on the Multi-MiniComputer System (MMCS). Optimal use of the AP-120B array processor and the pipeline processing provided by using the Eclipse 200s and the Nova 3 make a marked improvement in overall throughput.


Nerve Fiber Sciatic Nerve Regenerate Nerve Template Match Pipeline Processing 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bora, F.W., Peripheral nerve repair in cats.J. Bone J. Surg. 49A:659–666, 1967.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bora, F.W., Pleasure, D.E., and Didizian, N.A., A study of nerve regeneration and neuroma formation after nerve suture by various techniques.J. Hand Surg. 1:138–143, 1976.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cabaud, H.E., Rodkey, W.G., McCarrol, H.R., Muntz, S.B., and Niebauer, J.J., Epineurial and perineurial fascicular nerve repairs: A critical comparison.J. Hand Surg. 1:131–137, 1976.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dietrich, T.J., Nerve repair—epineural, perineural or intraneural suture? Unpublished, presented at Grand Rounds, Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, Loma Linda University, 1975.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Evans, D.H.L., and Murray, J.G., A study of regeneration in a motor nerve with a unimodal fiber diameter distribution.Anat. Rec. 126:311–329, 1956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Grabb, W.C., Medial and ulnar nerve suture: An experimental study comparing primary and secondary repair in monkeys.J. Bone J. Surg. 50:964–972, July, 1968.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lavarack, L.O., Sunderland, S., and Ray, L.J., The branching of nerve fibers in human cutaneous nerves.J. Comp. Neurol. 94:293–310, 1951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mayer, R.F., Eiken, O., and Nabseth, D.C., Nerve regeneration in replanted canine limbs.Am. J. Physiol. 206:1415–1421, 1964.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Orgell, M.G., and Terzis, J.K., Epineurial vs perineurial repair, an ultrastructural and electrophysiological study of nerve regeneration.Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 60:80–91, 1977.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pleasure, D., Bora, F., Lane, J., and Prockop, D., Regeneration after nerve transection: Effect of inhibition of collagen synthesis.Exp. Neurol. 45:71, 1974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ritter, M.A., A histological evaluation of peripheral nerve repairs.Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 103:279–280, 1974.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schroder, J.M., Altered ratio between axon diameter and myelin sheath thickness in regenerated nerve fibers.Brain Res. 45:49–65, 1972.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shawe, G.D.H., On the number of branches formed by regenerated nerve fibers.Br. J. Surg. 42:474, 1955.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wise, A.J., Topuzlu, C., Davis, P., and Kaye, I.S., A comparative analysis of macro and micro surgical neurorrhaphy techniques.Am. J. Surg. 117:566–572, 1969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cragg, B.G., and Thomas, P.K., Changes in conduction velocity and fiber size proximal to peripheral nerve lesions.J. Physiol. (London), 157:315–327, 1961.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cragg, B.G., and Thomas, P.K., The conduction velocity of regenerated peripheral nerve fibers.J. Physiol. 171:164–175, 1964.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dellon, A.L., Reinnervation of denervated Meissner corpuscles: A sequential histologic study in the monkey following fascicular nerve repair.J. Hand Surg. 1:98–109, 1976.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hudson, A.R., Morris, J., Weddell, G., and Drury, A., Peripheral nerve autographs.J. Surg. Res. 12:267–274, 1972.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jacobson, S., and Guth, L., An electrophysiological study of the early stages of peripheral nerve regeneration.Exp. Neurol. 94:293–310, 1951.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jewett, D.L., Integrated monophasic compound action potential, IMCAP. Presented in part at the Symposium on Peripheral Nerve Injuries, San Francisco, November 4, 1977.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kline, D.G., Hayes, G.J., and Morse, A.S., A comparative study of response of species to peripheralnerve injury.J. Neurosurg. 21:968–979, 1964.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Snyder, C.C., Webster, H., Pickens, J.E., Hines, W.A., and Warden, G., Intraneural neurorrhaphy: A preliminary clinical and histological evaluation.Ann. Surg. 167:691–696, 1968.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Weddell, G., Axonal regeneration in cutaneous nerve plexus.J. Anat. 77:49, 1942.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Abercrombie, M., and Johnson, M.L., The effect of reinnervation on collagen formation in degenerating sciatic nerves of rabbits.J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry 10:89–92, 1947.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    O'Leary, D.P., Dunn, R.F., and Kumley, W.E., On-line computerized entry and display of nerve fiber cross sections using single or segmented histological records.Comput. Biomed. Res. 9:229–237, 1976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Higbie, L.C., Supercomputer architecture.Computer 48–58, December 1973.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Higbie, L.C., Applications of vector processing.Comput. Des. 139–145, April 1978.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Johnson, P., An introduction to vector processing.Comput. Des. 89–97, February 1978.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Thurber, K.J., and Berg, R.O., Applications of associative procesorsComput. Des. 103–110, November 1971.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wittmayer, W.R., Array processor provides high throughput rates.Comput. Des. 93–100, March 1978.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bartels, P.H., and Wied, G.L., Computer analysis and biomedical interpretation of microscopic images: Current problems and future directions.Proc. IEEE 65:252–261, 1977.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Casey, M.E., Automated particle counting with applications to neurology. Master's thesis, University of Tennessee. Knoxville, 1977.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Enslow, P.H., Jr., ed.,Multiprocesors and Parallel Processing. Wiley, 1974.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kasvand, T., Pattern recognition applied to the counting of nerve fiber cross sections and water droplets.Proceedings of the International Conference on Methods of Pattern Recognition (S. Watanabe, ed.), 1968, pp. 333–343.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Parnell, J.N., and Lestrel, P.E., A computer program for comparing irregular two-dimensional forms.Comput. Programs Biomed. 7:145–161, 1977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Potts, A.M., Hodges, D., Shelman, C.B., Fritz, K.J., Levy, N.S., and Mangnall, Y., Morphology of the primate optic nerve. I: Method and total fiber count.Invest. Ophthalmol. 11:980–988, 1972.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Selverston, A.I., and Woodward, D.J., Workshop on computer assisted neuroanatomy, December 12–14, 1976, LaJolla. Prepared for National Institutes of Health, Biotechnical Research Branch, Bethesda, Maryland, June 1977.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Frykman, G.K., Wood, V.E., and Hall, E.L., Automated nerve fiber counting in complex animal nerves.Management of Peripheral Nerve Problems (G. Omer and M. Spinner, eds.), Saunders, Philadelphia, 1977.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Willey, T.J., and Kellner, E., Basis functions for sinusoidal evoked potentials: A waveform analysis program on a small computer.Comput. Programs Biomed. 3:153–159, 1973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Gordon, B.G., The search for the 10 second FFT. To appear in Report of the 22nd annual technical symposium of S.P.I.E.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Grabb, W.C., Bement, S.L., Koepke, G.H., and Green, R.A., Comparison of methods of peripheral nerve suturing in monkeys.Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 46:31–37, July 1970.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1980

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gary K. Frykman
    • 1
    • 2
  • Harold G. Rutherford
    • 1
    • 2
  • Ivan R. Neilsen
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation School of MedicineLoma Linda UniversityLoma LindaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Biomathematics, School of MedicineLoma Linda UniversityLoma LindaUSA

Personalised recommendations