SoftCut: A Virtual Planning Tool for Soft Tissue Resection on CT Images

  • Ludovic Blache
  • Fredrik Nysjö
  • Filip Malmberg
  • Andreas Thor
  • Andrés Rodríguez Lorenzo
  • Ingela Nyström
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 894)


With the increasing use of three-dimensional (3D) models and Computer Aided Design (CAD) in the medical domain, virtual surgical planning is now frequently used. Most of the current solutions focus on bone surgical operations. However, for head and neck oncologic resection, soft tissue ablation and reconstruction are common operations. In this paper, we propose a method to provide a fast and efficient estimation of shape and dimensions of soft tissue resections. Our approach takes advantage of a simple sketch-based interface which allows the user to paint the contour of the resection on a patient specific 3D model reconstructed from a computed tomography (CT) scan. The volume is then virtually cut and carved following this pattern. From the outline of the resection defined on the skin surface as a closed curve, we can identify which areas of the skin are inside or outside this shape. We then use distance transforms to identify the soft tissue voxels which are closer from the inside of this shape. Thus, we can propagate the shape of the resection inside the soft tissue layers of the volume. We demonstrate the usefulness of the method on patient specific CT data.


  1. 1.
    Girod, S., Keeve, E., Girod, B.: Advances in interactive craniofacial surgery planning by 3D simulation and visualization. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 24, 120–125 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sarti, A., et al.: Virtual planning of facial reconstructions. Imaging Decis. MRI 11, 29–38 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Carrillo, F., et al.: A time saver: optimization approach for the fully automatic 3D planning of forearm osteotomies. In: Descoteaux, M., Maier-Hein, L., Franz, A., Jannin, P., Collins, D.L., Duchesne, S. (eds.) MICCAI 2017. LNCS, vol. 10434, pp. 488–496. Springer, Cham (2017). Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ozdemir, F., Karani, N., Fürnstahl, P., Goksel, O.: Interactive segmentation in MRI for orthopedic surgery planning: bone tissue. Int. J. Comput. Assist. Radiol. Surg. 12, 1031–1039 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zeng, C., Xing, W., Wu, Z., Huang, H., Huang, W.: A combination of three-dimensional printing and computer-assisted virtual surgical procedure for preoperative planning of acetabular fracture reduction. Injury 47, 2223–2227 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Olsson, P., Nysjö, F., Hirsch, J., Carlbom, I.: A haptics-assisted cranio-maxillofacial surgery planning system for restoring skeletal anatomy in complex trauma cases. Int. J. Comput. Assist. Radiol. Surg. 8, 887–894 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cordes, J., Dornheim, J., Preim, B., Hertel, I., Strauss, G.: Pre-operative segmentation of neck CT datasets for the planning of neck dissections. In: Proceedings of SPIE Medical Imaging (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wang, G., et al.: Slic-seg: a minimally interactive segmentation of the placenta from sparse and motion-corrupted fetal MRI in multiple views. Med. Image Anal. 34, 137–147 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Smektala, T., et al.: Three-dimensional eyeball and orbit volume modification after LeFort III midface distraction. J. Craniofac. Surg. 26, 1652–1655 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Petersik, A., Pflesser, B., Tiede, U., Höhne, K.-H., Leuwer, R.: Realistic haptic interaction in volume sculpting for surgery simulation. In: Ayache, N., Delingette, H. (eds.) IS4TM 2003. LNCS, vol. 2673, pp. 194–202. Springer, Heidelberg (2003). Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chen, H.L.J., Samavati, F.F., Sousa, M.C.: GPU-based point radiation for interactive volume sculpting and segmentation. Vis. Comput. 24, 689–698 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ning, H., Yang, R., Ma, A., Wu, X.: Interactive 3D medical data cutting using closed curve with arbitrary shape. Comput. Med. Imag. Graph. 40, 120–127 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Xu, C., Li, S., Wang, L., Xiao, C.: CT image based 3D orbital prosthesis model construction method. In: 2016 IEEE Advanced Information Management, Communicates, Electronic and Automation Control Conference (IMCEC), pp. 204–208 (2016)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kruger, J., Westermann, R.: Acceleration techniques for GPU-based volume rendering. In: Proceedings of the 14th IEEE Visualization, VIS 2003, pp. 287–292 (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Saito, T., Toriwaki, J.I.: New algorithms for Euclidean distance transformation of an n-dimensional digitized picture with applications. Pattern Recogn. 27, 1551–1565 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Borgefors, G.: Distance transformations in arbitrary dimensions. Comput. Vis. Graph. Image Process. 27, 321–345 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lorensen, W.E., Cline, H.E.: Marching cubes: a high resolution 3D surface construction algorithm. ACM SIGGRAPH Comput. Graph. 21, 163–169 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Taubin, G.: A signal processing approach to fair surface design. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques, SIGGRAPH 1995, pp. 351–358 (1995)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ludovic Blache
    • 1
  • Fredrik Nysjö
    • 1
  • Filip Malmberg
    • 1
  • Andreas Thor
    • 2
  • Andrés Rodríguez Lorenzo
    • 2
  • Ingela Nyström
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Image AnalysisUppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden
  2. 2.Plastic, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Surgical SciencesUppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden

Personalised recommendations