Related Experiment Videos
Deep learning-based estimation of sagittal spinal alignment from coronal radiographs
Tito Bassani1, Riccardo Cecchinato2,3, Marco Brayda-Bruno2
1Laboratory of Biological Structures Mechanics, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy.
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
|August 4, 2026
Summary
Directly predicting spinal sagittal parameters from coronal X-rays using multiple-output regression (MOR) shows limited accuracy. Current deep learning methods, including MOR and generative adversarial networks (GANs), cannot replace biplanar imaging for reliable sagittal assessment.
Area of Science:
- Spine biomechanics
- Medical imaging analysis
- Deep learning applications in radiology
Background:
- Patient-specific sagittal alignment parameters are crucial for spinal biomechanical modeling.
- Traditional biplanar radiographs involve radiation exposure, prompting research into alternative methods.
- Previous deep learning attempts for cross-plane prediction, like GANs, have not met clinical accuracy standards.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate multiple-output regression (MOR) for directly predicting sagittal spinal parameters from coronal radiographs.
- To evaluate the performance of MOR against generative adversarial network (GAN)-based approaches for this task.
Main Methods:
- A convolutional neural network-based MOR model was trained and tested on a dataset of 449 adult subjects' EOS biplanar radiographs.
- Six key sagittal parameters (TK, LL, SS, PI, PT, SVA) were predicted from coronal images.
- Performance was assessed using absolute error, regression analysis, Bland-Altman plots, and Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), with external validation on an adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) dataset.
Main Results:
- In adults, MOR showed median absolute errors of 4°-8° for angular parameters and 1.6 cm for SVA, with significant biases.
- Concordance correlation coefficients (CCC) ranged from 0.20 to 0.69, indicating weak to moderate agreement for most parameters.
- In AIS patients, MOR and GANs had comparable median errors (~7°), though GANs performed better for SVA (1 cm vs. 2 cm).
Conclusions:
- Direct MOR prediction of sagittal parameters from coronal radiographs yields limited accuracy and systematic biases.
- The comparable performance of MOR and GANs suggests insufficient sagittal information in coronal views is the main limitation.
- Current deep learning techniques are inadequate to replace biplanar imaging for reliable spinal sagittal assessment.