A novel method for digital X-ray imaging of the complete spine

  • Alexander H. W. van Eeuwijk
  • Steven Lobregt
  • Frans A. Gerritsen
Basic Tools and Applications in Spine Surgery
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1205)


One of the practical reasons for applying film-cassettes instead of digitized video images, is that for some applications the entrance plane of the Image Intensifier is too small to cover the relevant part of a patients anatomy in one single exposure. Imaging of the deformed spine is such an application.

We use standard digital X-ray equipment to acquire a number of images with smaller Field Of View (FOV) and translated along the path of the spine. Together these images will cover the complete spine. A special algorithm is developed to paste these images together to form an overview of the complete spine.

The proposed acquisition protocol in combination with the presented overview reconstruction method offers a lot of advantages. Modern standard digital X-ray equipment can be used. The required X-ray dose is lower than for conventional radiographs, while image quality is better. Computer assisted measurements can be performed on these overview images with accurate results).

The standard in orthopedics for quantifying the degree of scoliosis, is measuring Cobb's Angle. We investigated the influence of our overview reconstruction technique on this measurement and compared this influence with other error sources which play a role in conventional film based technique as well as in our digital technique.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    W. Skalli, F Lavaste and J Descrimes., “Quantification of Three-Dimensional Vertebral Rotations in Scoliosis: What Are True Values?”, Spine, Vol 20 No 5 pp 546–553, 1995.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    B. Drerup and E. Hierholzer, “Evaluation of frontal radiographs of scoliotic spines— part 1: Measurement of position and orientation of vertebrae and assessment of clinical shape parameters”, J. Biomechanics, Vol. 25, No. 11, pp. 1357–1362, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    B. Drerup, “Principles of measurement of vertebral rotation from frontal projections of the pedicles”, J. Biomechanics, Vol. 17, No. 12, pp. 923–935, 1984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    D.L. Carman, “Measurement of Scoliosis and Kyphosis Radiographs (Intra-observer and Inter-observer Variation)”, The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Incorporated, Vol. 72-A, No. 3, pp. 328–333, March 1990.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    B. Jeffries, “Computerized Measurement and Analysis of Scoliosis”, Pediatric Radiology, 134, pp. 381–385, February 1980.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    R. Morrissy, “Measurements of the Cobb Angle on Radiographs of Patients Who Have Scoliosis”, The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Incorporated, Vol. 72-A, No. 3, pp. 320–327, March 1990.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    I. Stokes, “Re-examination of the Cobb and Ferguson Angles: Bigger is Not always Better”, Journal of Spinal Disorders, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 333–338, 1993.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    K. Singer, “A comparison of radiographic and computer assisted measurements of thoracic and thoracolumbar sagittal curvature”, Skeletal Radiology, 19, pp. 21–29, 1990.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cobb, J. R., “Outline for the study of scoliosis. Instructional Course Lectures”, The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, Vol. 5, pp 261–275, 1948Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexander H. W. van Eeuwijk
    • 1
  • Steven Lobregt
    • 1
  • Frans A. Gerritsen
    • 1
  1. 1.Philips Medical SystemsThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations