scholarly journals OC14.02: Three dimensional imaging of fetal skeletal dysplasia: comparison of 2D, 3D ultrasound and helical computed tomography

2009 ◽  
Vol 34 (S1) ◽  
pp. 26-26
Author(s):  
M. Senat ◽  
M. Mabille ◽  
F. Fuchs ◽  
R. Frydman ◽  
J. M. Levaillant
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Skeletal Dysplasia ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
3D Ultrasound ◽  
Helical Computed Tomography ◽  
Three Dimensional Imaging

scholarly journals Three-dimensional helical computed tomography in prenatal diagnosis of fetal skeletal dysplasia

2013 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 161-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Macé ◽  
P. Sonigo ◽  
V. Cormier-Daire ◽  
M.-C. Aubry ◽  
J. Martinovic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Prenatal Diagnosis ◽  
Skeletal Dysplasia ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Helical Computed Tomography

Prenatal diagnosis of platyspondylic skeletal dysplasia Torrance type with three-dimensional helical computed tomography

2009 ◽  
Vol 29 (13) ◽  
pp. 1282-1284 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shunsuke Tamaru ◽  
Akihiko Kikuchi ◽  
Kimiyo Takagi ◽  
Masao Wakamatsu ◽  
Kyoko Ono ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Prenatal Diagnosis ◽  
Skeletal Dysplasia ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Helical Computed Tomography

Three-dimensional imaging and osteometry of adult human skulls using helical computed tomography

1998 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 291-297 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Nagashima ◽  
K. Inoue ◽  
T. Sasaki ◽  
K. Miyasaka ◽  
G. Matsumura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Helical Computed Tomography ◽  
Three Dimensional Imaging ◽  
Adult Human ◽  
Human Skulls

Diagnosis of fetal anomalies by three-dimensional imaging using helical computed tomography

1997 ◽  
Vol 17 (7) ◽  
pp. 670-674 ◽  
Author(s):  
Satoshi Sohda ◽  
Hiromi Hamada ◽  
Akinori Oki ◽  
Mariko Iwasaki ◽  
Takeshi Kubo
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Helical Computed Tomography ◽  
Fetal Anomalies ◽  
Three Dimensional Imaging

Prenatal diagnosis of agnathia-holoprosencephaly: three-dimensional imaging by helical computed tomography

2001 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yasuhiko Ebina ◽  
Hideto Yamada ◽  
Emi Hirayama Kato ◽  
Fumie Tanuma ◽  
Shigeki Shimada ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Prenatal Diagnosis ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Helical Computed Tomography ◽  
Three Dimensional Imaging

scholarly journals Three-dimensional ultrasound for knee osteophyte depiction: a comparative study to computed tomography

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valeria Vendries ◽  
Tamas Ungi ◽  
Jordan Harry ◽  
Manuela Kunz ◽  
Jana Podlipská ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Automatic Segmentation ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
3D Ultrasound ◽  
Surgical Interventions ◽  
Structured Light Scanner ◽  
Joint Surfaces ◽  
Operative Planning ◽  
Rms Error ◽  
Tissue Characteristics

Abstract Purpose Osteophytes are common radiographic markers of osteoarthritis. However, they are not accurately depicted using conventional imaging, thus hampering surgical interventions that rely on pre-operative images. Studies have shown that ultrasound (US) is promising at detecting osteophytes and monitoring the progression of osteoarthritis. Furthermore, three-dimensional (3D) ultrasound reconstructions may offer a means to quantify osteophytes. The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of osteophyte depiction in the knee joint between 3D US and conventional computed tomography (CT). Methods Eleven human cadaveric knees were pre-screened for the presence of osteophytes. Three osteoarthritic knees were selected, and then, 3D US and CT images were obtained, segmented, and digitally reconstructed in 3D. After dissection, high-resolution structured light scanner (SLS) images of the joint surfaces were obtained. Surface matching and root mean square (RMS) error analyses of surface distances were performed to assess the accuracy of each modality in capturing osteophytes. The RMS errors were compared between 3D US, CT and SLS models. Results Average RMS error comparisons for 3D US versus SLS and CT versus SLS models were 0.87 mm ± 0.33 mm (average ± standard deviation) and 0.95 mm ± 0.32 mm, respectively. No statistical difference was found between 3D US and CT. Comparative observations of imaging modalities suggested that 3D US better depicted osteophytes with cartilage and fibrocartilage tissue characteristics compared to CT. Conclusion Using 3D US can improve the depiction of osteophytes with a cartilaginous portion compared to CT. It can also provide useful information about the presence and extent of osteophytes. Whilst algorithm improvements for automatic segmentation and registration of US are needed to provide a more robust investigation of osteophyte depiction accuracy, this investigation puts forward the potential application for 3D US in routine diagnostic evaluations and pre-operative planning of osteoarthritis.

Three-dimensional imaging of teeth and jaw bones using fluoroscopic computed tomography (FCT)

1988 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-79 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fukai Toyofuku ◽  
Takemasa Tanaka ◽  
Sigenobu Kanda
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Three Dimensional Imaging ◽  
Jaw Bones

Three Dimensional Imaging of Bone From Analysis of Computed Tomography Data

Orthopedics ◽  
1985 ◽  
Vol 8 (10) ◽  
pp. 1269-1273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven T Woolson ◽  
Linda L Fellingham ◽  
Parvati Dev ◽  
Arthur Vassiliadis
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Three Dimensional Imaging ◽  
Tomography Data
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document