The development of biomechanical models of the torso and the spine opens the door to computational solutions for the design of braces for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. However, the design of such biomechanical models faces several unknowns, such as the correct identification of relevant mechanical elements, or the required accuracy of model parameters. The objective of this study was to design a methodology for the identification of the aforementioned elements, with the purpose of creating personalized models suited for patient-specific brace design and the definition of parameter estimation criteria. We have developed a comprehensive model of the torso, including spine, ribcage and soft tissue, and we have developed computational tools for the analysis of the model parameters. With these tools, we perform an analysis of the model under typical loading conditions of scoliosis braces. We present a complete sensitivity analysis of the models mechanical parameters and a comparison between a reference healthy subject and a subject suffering from scoliosis. Furthermore, we make a direct connection between error bounds on the deformation and tolerances for parameter estimation, which can guide the personalization of the model. Not surprisingly, the stiffness parameters that govern the lateral deformation of the spine in the frontal plane are some of the most relevant parameters, and require careful modeling. More surprisingly, their relevance is on par with the correct parameterization of the soft tissue of the torso. For scoliosis patients, but not for healthy subjects, we observe that the axial rotation of the spine also requires careful modeling.

Introduction: The role of the spinal muscles in scoliogenesis is not fully substantiated. Do they act scoliogenic (inducing scoliosis) or counteract scoliosis in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS)? In this study, we will examine this by using selectively placed Transcutaneous Electric Stimulation (TES) combined with a cinematic radiographic technique and by performing electromyographic (EMG) evaluations during various motor tasks. Method: This is a cross-sectional study of subjects with small-curve AIS. Using cinematic radiography, they were evaluated dynamically either under electrical stimulation or when performing motor tasks of left and right lateral bending and rotation whilst measuring the muscle activity by EMG. Results: Forty-five patients with AIS were included as subjects. Five subjects volunteered for TES and six subjects performed the motor tasks with EMG. At the initial visual evaluation, and when stimulated with TES, the frontal plane spatial positions of the vertebral bodies showed discrete changes without an apparent pattern. However, analyzing the spatial positions when calibrated, we found that the spinal muscles exert a compressive ‘response’ with a minor change in the Cobb angle (CA) in small-curve AIS (CA = 10–20°). In larger curves (CA > 20°), TES induced a ‘larger deformity’ with a relative four-fold change in the CA compared to small-curve AIS with a ratio of 0.6. When evaluating local amplitude (peak) or cumulative (mean) EMG signals, we were unable to find consistent asymmetries. However, one subject had rapid progression and one regressed to a straight spine. When adding the absolute EMG ratios for all four motor tasks, the subject with progression had almost 10-fold less summed EMG ratios, and the subject with regression had more than 3-fold higher summed EMG ratios. Discussion: Based on these findings, we suggest that the spinal muscles in small-curve AIS have a stabilizing function maintaining a straight spine and keeping it in the midline. When deformities are larger (CA > 20°), the spine muscle curve exerts a scoliogenic ‘response’. This suggests that the role of the muscles converts from counteracting AIS and stabilizing the spine to being scoliogenic for a CA of more than 20°. Moreover, we interpret higher EMG ratios as heightened asymmetric spinal muscle activity when the spinal muscles try to balance the spine to maintain or correct the deformity. When progression occurs, this is preceded or accompanied by decreased EMG ratios. These findings must be substantiated by larger studies.

The use of patient-specific biomechanical models offers many opportunities in the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, such as the design of personalized braces. The first step in the development of these patient-specific models is to fit the geometry of the torso skeleton to the patient’s anatomy. However, existing methods rely on high-quality imaging data. The exposure to radiation of these methods limits their applicability for regular monitoring of patients. We present a method to fit personalized models of the torso skeleton that takes as input biplanar low-dose radiographs. The method morphs a template to fit annotated points on visible portions of the spine, and it relies on a default biomechanical model of the torso for regularization and robust fitting of hardly visible parts of the torso skeleton, such as the rib cage. The proposed method provides an accurate and robust solution to obtain personalized models of the torso skeleton, which can be adopted as part of regular management of scoliosis patients. We have evaluated the method on ten young patients who participated in our study. We have analyzed and compared clinical metrics on the spine and the full torso skeleton, and we have found that the accuracy of the method is at least comparable to other methods that require more demanding imaging methods, while it offers superior robustness to artifacts such as interpenetration of ribs. Normal-dose X-rays were available for one of the patients, and for the other nine we acquired low-dose X-rays, allowing us to validate that the accuracy of the method persisted under less invasive imaging modalities.

We present a methodology to personalize the stiffness response of a biomechanical model of the torso and the spine. In high contrast to previous work, the proposed methodology uses controlled force-deformation data that mimic the conditions of spinal bracing for scoliosis, which leads to personalized biomechanical models that are suitable for computational brace design. The novel methodology relies on several technical contributions. First, a prototype system that includes controlled force measurement and low-dose radiographs, with low-encumbrance for its implementation in the clinical protocol. Second, a model of differentiable biomechanics of the torso and the spine, which becomes the key building block for robust parameter estimation. And third, an optimization procedure for parameter estimation from force-deformation data, which relies on differentiability of the biomechanics and the image generation process. We demonstrate the application of the methodology to a cohort of 7 subjects who underwent scoliosis check-ups, and we show quantitative validation of the estimated personalized parameters and the improvement over default parameters from the bibliography.

Background/Objectives: Spinal flexibility radiographs are important in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) for clinical decision-making. In this study, we introduce a new method, the ‘quantitatively controlled standing fulcrum side-bending’ test (CSFS test). This is a feasibility study; we aimed to quantify the applied force and track the temporospatial changes in the spine specifically by measuring the continuous change in the Cobb angle (in degrees) during lateral bending. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, we included patients with AIS. Using a low-dose cinematic fluoroscopic technique, we captured the lateral bending of the thoracolumbar vertebral spine while inducing quantified lateral force on the ribs by a force gauge in a three-point fixation setup of controlled lateral bending. Trial registration number: H-1703423. Results: Twenty-one patients with small-curve AIS were included as subjects. All subjects performed the CSFS test adequately. They had small curves with a mean Cobb angle of 12.0 (range: 0.0–26.0, SD: 7.1). The measured median stiffness was 3.66 N/degrees (°) of the Cobb angle (range: 0.02–11.81) with a median coefficient of determination R² of 0.58 (range: 0.002–0.92) by regression analyses. When analysed concerning the median-term clinical outcome of either progression/regression or stationary curves, various Cobb angle measurements and the other experimental parameters, there were no significant relationships. Conclusions: The CSFS test is feasible to quantify the force applied and the temporospatial changes in the spine during lateral bending. The CSFS test has been utilised in basic research for mechanical characterisation of the scoliotic spine and has the potential of being implemented directly in patient-specific bracing to estimate the forces needed for brace correction and adjustment so as not to supersede the allowed skin pressure.