Dokument: Volumetrie der Schulterregion - Entwicklung eines optoelektronischen Messprotokolls
| Titel: | Volumetrie der Schulterregion - Entwicklung eines optoelektronischen Messprotokolls | |||||||
| Weiterer Titel: | Volumetry of the shoulder region - Development of an optoelectronic measurement protocol | |||||||
| URL für Lesezeichen: | https://docserv.uni-duesseldorf.de/servlets/DocumentServlet?id=70128 | |||||||
| URN (NBN): | urn:nbn:de:hbz:061-20250715-125320-4 | |||||||
| Kollektion: | Dissertationen | |||||||
| Sprache: | Deutsch | |||||||
| Dokumententyp: | Wissenschaftliche Abschlussarbeiten » Dissertation | |||||||
| Medientyp: | Text | |||||||
| Autor: | Scherer, Sebastian Josef [Autor] | |||||||
| Dateien: |
| |||||||
| Beitragende: | Gehrmann, Sebastian Viktor [Gutachter] Dizdar, Levent [Gutachter] | |||||||
| Dewey Dezimal-Klassifikation: | 600 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften » 610 Medizin und Gesundheit | |||||||
| Beschreibungen: | Schwellungen der Schulterregion werden in der klinischen Behandlung häufig beobachtet und können bei akuten Verletzungen, chronischen Pathologien, aber auch postoperativ auftreten. Bisher existiert keine klinische Methode zur Quantifizierung des Volumens der Schulter, daher können klinische Verläufe lediglich subjektiv ein-geschätzt werden, obwohl diese Verläufe Therapieentscheidungen bedingen können. Ebenso ist in der aktuellen Literatur gezeigt worden, dass die Bestimmung von Schwellungszuständen an anderen Körperregionen der Extremitäten, wie dem Handgelenk oder dem Kniegelenk, zu klinisch relevanten Ergebnissen führt. Die Studienhypothese ist, dass die zu entwickelnde Methode präzise, reproduzierbar und praktikabel das Volumen der Schulterregion erfassen kann. Es wird mit dieser Arbeit ein Messprotokoll erzeugt, um klinisch anwendbar eine Volumenbestimmung der Schulterregion am Menschen durchzuführen. Die Erfassung des Schultervolumens beinhaltet die Datenregistrierung mithilfe einer lasergestützten 3D-Kamera (Fa. Artec, Mod. Eva) und die Datenverarbeitung durch 3D-Programme (Fa. Artec Studio Professional©, 3D Systems Geomagic Freeform©) zur Erzeugung einer virtuellen Oberfläche der Schulterregion mit vorher festgelegten anatomischen Land-marken. Die Methode wird auf Inter- und Intraobservervariabilität überprüft und mithilfe von Phantommessungen sowie Messungen an gesunden Probanden optimiert. Die Ergebnisse der Messreihen werden anschließend statistisch deskriptiv ausge-wertet. Die Volumina des Prüfphantoms lagen bei 2,24 Litern, die der Probanden im Mittel bei 1,95 Litern. In Messungen konnte das Volumen der Schulter mit einer Varianz ± 0,00 bis 0,3 Litern, entsprechend einem Unterschied von ± 1,15 % bis 5,24 %, bestimmt werden. Es zeigt sich außerdem eine niedrige Variabilität der Messreihen am Phantom unter verschiedenen Untersuchern, aber eine höhere Variabilität zu unterschiedlichen Messzeitpunkten bei Verwendung verschiedener Schnittmasken am Probanden. Die Schnittmasken weichen, gesehen über alle Messzeitpunkte, bis zu 0,4 Litern voneinander ab. Durch die Methode ist es nun erstmals möglich, im klinischen Umfeld die Volumetrie der Schulterregion nichtinvasiv zur Beurteilung von Schwellungen zu verwenden und Behandlungsergebnisse im Verlauf zu objektivieren. Durch die Modularität des gewählten Ansatzes werden auch zukünftige, weiterentwickelte Registrierverfahren ermöglicht. Klinisch sind Anwendungen in verschiedenen Fachdisziplinen wie der Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie, der Allgemein-, Mund-Kiefer-Gesichtschirurgie sowie der Plastischen Chirurgie denkbar.Swelling of the shoulder region is frequently observed in clinical treatment and can occur in acute injuries, chronic pathologies, but also postoperatively. To date, there is no clinical method for quantifying the volume of the shoulder, so clinical progressions can only be assessed subjectively, although these progressions can inform treatment decisions. It has also been shown in the current literature that the determination of swelling conditions in other body regions of the extremities, such as the wrist or knee joint, leads to clinically relevant results. The hypothesis of the study is that the method to be developed can measure the volume of the shoulder region in a precise, reproducible and practicable manner. This work creates a measurement protocol for clinically applicable volume determination of the shoulder region in humans. The acquisition of the shoulder volume includes data registration using a laser-based 3D camera (Artec, Mod. Eva) and data processing using 3D programs (Artec Studio Professional©, 3D Systems Geomagic Freeform©) to generate a virtual surface of the shoulder region with previously defined anatomical landmarks. The method is tested for inter and intraobserver variability and optimized using phantom measurements and measurements on healthy subjects. The results of the series of measurements are then analysed statistically and descriptively. The volumes of the test phantom were 2.24 litres, those of the test subjects on average 1.95 litres. In measurements, the volume of the shoulder could be determined with a variance of ± 0.00 to 0.3 litres, corresponding to a difference of ± 1.15 % to 5.24 %. There is also a low variability of the measurement series on the phantom under different examiners, but a higher variability at different measurement times when using different cutting masks on the test subject. The cutting masks deviate from each other by up to 0.4 litres across all measurement times. The method now makes it possible for the first time to use non-invasive volumetry of the shoulder region in a clinical setting to assess swelling and objectify treatment results over the course of treatment. The modularity of the chosen approach also enables future, more advanced registration procedures. Clinical applications are conceivable in various specialist disciplines such as orthopaedics and trauma surgery, general surgery, oral and maxillofacial surgery and plastic surgery. | |||||||
| Quelle: | 1. Groh GI, Simoni M, Rolla P, Rockwood CA. Loss of the deltoid after shoulder operations: An operative disaster. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1994;3(4):243-53.
2. Ackland DC, Roshan-Zamir S, Richardson M, Pandy MG. Muscle and jointcontact loading at the glenohumeral joint after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. J Orthop Res. 2011;29(12):1850-8. 3. Bechtol CO. Biomechanics of the shoulder. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1980(146):37-41. 4. de Groot JH, van Woensel W, van der Helm FC. Effect of different arm loads on the position of the scapula in abduction postures. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 1999;14(5):309-14. 5. Europe A. Produktinformation Artec Eva und Artec Studio Professional [Website]. 2022 [Available from: https://www.artec3d.com/de/portable-3dscanners/ artec-eva. 6. 3D A. Certificate Of Compliance - Scanner #EV.30.93395885. 2017 02.11.2017. 7. Koban KC, Etzel L, Li Z, Pazos M, Schonecker S, Belka C, et al. Threedimensional surface imaging in breast cancer: a new tool for clinical studies? Radiat Oncol. 2020;15(1):52. 8. Kroh A, Peters F, Alizai PH, Schmitz S, Hölzle F, Neumann UP, et al. 3D Optical Imaging as a New Tool for the Objective Evaluation of Body Shape Changes After Bariatric Surgery. Obes Surg. 2020;30(5):1866-73. 9. Bahk MS, Greiwe RM. What Are Practical Surgical Anatomic Landmarks and Distances from Relevant Neurologic Landmarks in Cadavers for the Posterior Approach in Shoulder Arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2021;479(10):2323-31. 10. De Vries KD, Brown R, Mazzie J, Jung M-K, Yao SC, Terzella MJ. Effect of Ultrasonography on Student Learning of Shoulder Anatomy and Landmarks. Journal of Osteopathic Medicine. 2018;118(1):34-9. 11. Apaydin N, Uz A, Bozkurt M, Elhan A. The anatomic relationships of the axillary nerve and surgical landmarks for its localization from the anterior aspect of the shoulder. Clin Anat. 2007;20(3):273-7. 12. Fehse R. Schulterverletzungen aus Sicht der gesetzlichen Unfallversicherung. Trauma und Berufskrankheit. 2014;16(S2):142-5. 13. Nuket Gocmen M, Hamit Selim K, Mete E, Orhan M. Importance of Anatomical Landmarks on Axillary Neurovascular Territories for Surgery. In: Francisco JA, editor. Current Concepts in Plastic Surgery. Rijeka: IntechOpen; 2012. p. Ch. 11. 14. Mohammed H, Skalski MR, Patel DB, Tomasian A, Schein AJ, White EA, et al. Coracoid Process: The Lighthouse of the Shoulder. Radiographics. 2016;36(7):2084-101. 15. Gordon A, Alsayouri K. Anatomy, Shoulder and Upper Limb, Axilla. StatPearls. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing Copyright © 2024, StatPearls Publishing LLC.; 2024. 16. Elmeligie MM, Allam NM, Yehia RM, Ashour AA. Systematic review and meta-analysis on the effectiveness of ultrasound-guided versus landmark corticosteroid injection in the treatment of shoulder pain: an update. Journal of Ultrasound. 2022;26(3):593-604. 17. Poehling GG. Editorial Commentary: Elbow Lateral Epicondylitis (Tennis Elbow) Surgery Works, but Is Not Often Indicated. Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery. 2017;33(6):1269. 18. Stroyan M, Wilk KE. The Functional Anatomy of the Elbow Complex. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1993;17(6):279-88. 19. Alrabaa RG, Ahmad CS. Latissimus Dorsi Tendon Repair. Arthrosc Tech. 2020;9(2):e267-e73. 20. Landau MJ, Kim JS, Gould DJ, Patel KM. Vectra 3D Imaging for Quantitative Volumetric Analysis of the Upper Limb: A Feasibility Study for Tracking Outcomes of Lymphedema Treatment. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;141(1):80e-4e. 21. Cau N, Galli M, Cimolin V, Grossi A, Battarin I, Puleo G, et al. Quantitative comparison between the laser scanner three-dimensional method and the circumferential method for evaluation of arm volume in patients with lymphedema. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 018;6(1):96-103. 22. Koban KC, Titze V, Etzel L, Frank K, Schenck T, Giunta R. [Quantitative volumetric analysis of the lower extremity: validation against established tape measurement and water displacement]. Handchir Mikrochir Plast Chir. 2018;50(6):393-9. 23. Rabe E, Stucker M, Ottillinger B. Water displacement leg volumetry in clinical studies--a discussion of error sources. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10:5. 24. Devoogdt N, Cavaggion C, Van der Gucht E, Dams L, De Groef A, Meeus M, et al. Reliability, Validity, and Feasibility of Water Displacement Method, Figure-of-Eight Method, and Circumference Measurements in Determination of Ankle and Foot Edema. Lymphat Res Biol. 2019;17(5):531-6. 25. White BN, Lu IM, Kao LS, Dixon JB, Weiler MJ, Frank ND, et al. An infrared 3D scanning device as a novel limb volume measurement tool in breast cancer patients. World J Surg Oncol. 2020;18(1):278. 26. Kuhnke E. Volumbestimmung aus umfangmessungen. Folia Angiologica. 1976;24(S 228). 27. Gianesini S, Raffetto JD, Mosti G, Maietti E, Sibilla MG, Zamboni P, et al. Volume control of the lower limb with graduated compression during different muscle pump activation conditions and the relation to limb circumference variation. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2020;8(5):814-20. 28. Mason C, Craig CL, Katzmarzyk PT. Influence of Central and Extremity Circumferences on All-cause Mortality in Men and Women. Obesity. 2008;16(12):2690-5. 29. Tantawy SA, Abdelbasset WK, Nambi G, Kamel DM. Comparative Study Between the Effects of Kinesio Taping and Pressure Garment on Secondary Upper Extremity Lymphedema and Quality of Life Following Mastectomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Integr Cancer Ther. 2019;18:153473541984727. 30. Abdulkareem NK, Hajee SI, Hassan FF, Ibrahim IK, Al-Khalidi REH, Abdulqader NA. Investigating the slice thickness effect on noise and diagnostic content of single-source multi-slice computerized axial tomography. J Med Life. 2023;16(6):862-7. 31. Neubauer J, Benndorf M, Reidelbach C, Krauß T, Lampert F, Zajonc H, et al. Comparison of Diagnostic Accuracy of Radiation Dose-Equivalent Radiography, Multidetector Computed Tomography and Cone Beam Computed Tomography for Fractures of Adult Cadaveric Wrists. PLoS One. 2016;11(10):e0164859. 32. Huang AJ, Chang CY, Thomas BJ, MacMahon PJ, Palmer WE. Using conebeam CT as a low-dose 3D imaging technique for the extremities: initial experience in 50 subjects. Skeletal Radiol. 2015;44(6):797-809. 33. Carrino JA, Al Muhit A, Zbijewski W, Thawait GK, Stayman JW, Packard N, et al. Dedicated Cone-Beam CT System for Extremity Imaging. Radiology. 2014;270(3):816-24. 34. Zbijewski W, De Jean P, Prakash P, Ding Y, Stayman JW, Packard N, et al. A dedicated cone-beam CT system for musculoskeletal extremities imaging: Design, optimization, and initial performance characterization. Med Phys. 2011;38(8):4700-13. 35. Saar A. Principle of CBCT (Cone Beam Computed Tomography) 2014 [Available from: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/ b/bb/Cone_Beam_CT_principle.png. 36. Ghouri MA, Gupta N, Bhat AP, Thimmappa ND, Saboo SS, Khandelwal A, et al. CT and MR imaging of the upper extremity vasculature: pearls, pitfalls, and challenges. Cardiovascular Diagnosis and Therapy. 2019;9(S1):S152- S73. 37. Henninger HB, Christensen GV, Taylor CE, Kawakami J, Hillyard BS, Tashjian RZ, et al. The Muscle Cross-sectional Area on MRI of the Shoulder Can Predict Muscle Volume: An MRI Study in Cadavers. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2020;478(4):871-83. 38. Chu SK, Rho ME. Hamstring Injuries in the Athlete. Curr Sports Med Rep. 2016;15(3):184-90. 39. Zheng F, Wang H, Gong H, Fan H, Zhang K, Du L. Role of Ultrasound in the Detection of Rotator-Cuff Syndrome: An Observational Study. Med Sci Monit. 2019;25:5856-63. 40. RSatUSZ. Longitudinal ultra sonography of the supraspinatus tendon 2010 [Available from: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/37/ Longitudinal_US_supraspinatus.jpg. 41. Oezel L, Latz D, Gehrmann SV, Taday R, Windolf J, Schiffner E. Volumetry of Hand and Forearm: A 3D Volumetric Approach. Hand (N Y). 2022:15589447221141492. 42. Taday R, Schiffner E, Gehrmann SV, Wilms LM, Kaufmann RA, Windolf J, et al. Establishing regions of interest of the lower leg and ankle for perioperative volumetric assessment with a portable 3D scanner in orthopedic and trauma surgery - a pilot study. J Foot Ankle Res. 2023;16(1):87. 43. Knoops PG, Beaumont CA, Borghi A, Rodriguez-Florez N, Breakey RW, Rodgers W, et al. Comparison of three-dimensional scanner systems for craniomaxillofacial imaging. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2017;70(4):441- 9. 44. Ozsoy U, Sekerci R, Hizay A, Yildirim Y, Uysal H. Assessment of reproducibility and reliability of facial expressions using 3D handheldscanner. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2019;47(6) :895-901. 45. Franco De Sá Gomes C, Libdy MR, Normando D. Scan time, reliability and accuracy of craniofacial measurements using a 3D light scanner. Journal of Oral Biology and Craniofacial Research. 2019;9(4):331-5. 46. Seminati E, Canepa Talamas D, Young M, Twiste M, Dhokia V, Bilzon JLJ. Validity and reliability of a novel 3D scanner for assessment of the shape and volume of amputees' residual limb models. PLoS One. 2017;12(9):e0184498. 47. Kovacs L, Yassouridis A, Zimmermann A, Brockmann G, Wohnl A, Blaschke M, et al. Optimization of 3-dimensional imaging of the breast region with 3-dimensional laser scanners. Ann Plast Surg. 2006;56(3):229-36. 48. Kovacs L, Eder M, Hollweck R, Zimmermann A, Settles M, Schneider A, et al. New aspects of breast volume measurement using 3-dimensional surface imaging. Ann Plast Surg. 2006;57(6):602-10. 49. Shinkai H, Yamamoto M, Tatebe M, Iwatsuki K, Kurimoto S, Hirata H. Noninvasive volumetric analysis of asymptomatic hands using a 3-D scanner. PLoS One. 2017;12(8):e0182675. 50. Buffa R, Mereu E, Lussu P, Succa V, Pisanu T, Buffa F, et al. A New, Effective and Low-Cost Three-Dimensional Approach for the Estimation of Upper-Limb Volume. Sensors. 2015;15(6):12342-57. | |||||||
| Lizenz: |  Dieses Werk ist lizenziert unter einer Creative Commons Namensnennung 4.0 International Lizenz | |||||||
| Bezug: | 2021-2025 | |||||||
| Fachbereich / Einrichtung: | Medizinische Fakultät | |||||||
| Dokument erstellt am: | 15.07.2025 | |||||||
| Dateien geändert am: | 15.07.2025 | |||||||
| Promotionsantrag am: | 02.04.2025 | |||||||
| Datum der Promotion: | 03.07.2025 |
