Bone reconstruction and orthopedic implants

Abstract

Providing bone reconstruction and orthopedic implants. [Solution] A surgical navigation system comprising a signal receiver communicatively coupled to a main processor, the main processor being programmed to calculate changes in three-dimensional position of an inertial measurement unit attached to a surgical instrument using a sequential Monte Carlo algorithm, the processor being communicatively coupled to a first memory storing unique instrument data for each of a plurality of surgical instruments and a second memory storing model data sufficient to construct a three-dimensional model of anatomical features, the main processor being communicatively coupled to a display providing visual feedback regarding the three-dimensional position of the surgical instrument relative to the anatomical features.

Description

[Technical field]

[0001] CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61 / 913,608 entitled "CRANIUM AND POSTCRANIAL BONE AND SOFT TISSUE RECONSTRUCTION," filed December 9, 2013; U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61 / 951,221 entitled "CRANIUM AND POSTCRANIAL BONE AND SOFT TISSUE RECONSTRUCTION," filed March 11, 2014; U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61 / 977,984 entitled "CRANIUM AND POSTCRANIAL BONE AND SOFT TISSUE RECONSTRUCTION," filed April 10, 2014; and U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 62 / 022,899 entitled "CRANIUM AND POSTCRANIAL BONE AND SOFT TISSUE RECONSTRUCTION," filed July 10, 2014, the disclosures of each of which are incorporated herein by reference.

[0002] The present disclosure is directed to various aspects of orthopaedics, such as bone reconstruction and tissue reconstruction, patient-specific and mass-customized orthopaedic implants, gender and ethnicity specific orthopaedic implants, cutting guides, trauma plates, bone graft cutting and placement guides, patient-specific instruments, use of inertial measurement units for anatomical tracking for kinematics and pathology, and use of inertial measurement units for navigation during orthopaedic surgery. Summary of the Invention [Means for solving the problem]

[0003] A first aspect of the present invention provides a surgical navigation system comprising a signal receiver communicatively coupled to a primary processor, the primary processor being programmed to calculate a change in three-dimensional position of an inertial measurement unit attached to a surgical instrument using a sequential Monte Carlo algorithm, the processor being communicatively coupled to a first memory storing unique instrument data for each of a plurality of surgical instruments and a second memory storing model data sufficient to construct a three-dimensional model of an anatomical feature, the primary processor being communicatively coupled to a display providing visual feedback regarding the three-dimensional position of the surgical instrument relative to the anatomical feature.

[0004] In a more detailed embodiment of the first aspect, the surgical navigation system further comprises a reference inertial measurement unit configured to be attached to an anatomical feature, the reference inertial measurement unit being communicatively coupled to a first built-in processor and a first wireless transmitter and transmitting data to the primary processor, the reference inertial measurement unit being configured to be attached to the anatomical feature, the first built-in processor directing the transmission of data from the reference inertial measurement unit to the first wireless transmitter, the inertial measurement unit attached to the surgical instrument comprising an operational inertial measurement unit communicatively coupled to a second built-in processor and a second wireless transmitter, the second built-in processor being configured to be attached to one of the plurality of surgical instruments, the primary processor being communicatively coupled to a primary receiver configured to receive data from the first wireless transmitter and data from the second wireless transmitter. In yet another more detailed embodiment, the second built-in processor directs the transmission via the second wireless transmitter of an identity of the surgical instrument to which the operational inertial measurement unit is attached. In a more detailed embodiment, the inertial measurement unit includes at least three accelerometers and three magnetometers, each of the at least three accelerometers outputting a total of nine or more accelerometer data streams for data for three axes, each of the at least three magnetometers outputting a total of nine or more magnetometer data streams for data for three axes, and the primary processor utilizes the nine accelerometer data streams and the nine magnetometer data streams to calculate a change in three dimensional position of the inertial measurement unit attached to the surgical instrument. In yet another detailed embodiment, the model data stored in the second memory includes a three dimensional virtual model of an anatomical feature, the instrument data stored in the first memory includes a three dimensional virtual model of a plurality of surgical instruments, the display displays the three dimensional virtual models of the anatomical feature, the display displays the three dimensional virtual models of the surgical instruments, the primary processor is operative to reposition the three dimensional virtual model of the anatomical feature utilizing data from the reference inertial measurement unit, and the primary processor is operative to reposition the three dimensional virtual model of the surgical instrument utilizing data from the operational inertial measurement unit.In a more detailed embodiment, the primary processor operates to utilize data from the inertial measurement unit to reposition the three-dimensional virtual model of the surgical instrument in real time relative to the three-dimensional virtual model of the anatomical feature. In a more detailed embodiment, the sequential Monte Carlo algorithm includes a von Mises-Fisher density algorithm component. In another more detailed embodiment, the instrument data stored in the first memory includes position data indicative of a relative distance between an end effector of the surgical instrument and a mounting point of the inertial measurement unit on the surgical instrument, the surgical instrument including at least one of a reamer, a cup positioner, an impactor, a drill, a saw, and a cutting guide. In yet another more detailed embodiment, the inertial measurement unit includes at least three magnetometers, and the display is at least one of a state of coupling to the surgical instrument or a state of coupling to the primary processor.

[0005] A second aspect of the present invention provides a calibration system for an inertial measurement unit having a magnetometer and an accelerometer, the calibration system comprising: (a) a main platform rotationally repositionable relative to an intermediate platform along a first axis; (b) a final platform rotationally repositionable relative to the intermediate platform along a second axis, the second axis being perpendicular to the first axis, the final platform comprising a holder configured for attachment to the inertial measurement unit; and (c) a processor and associated software configured to communicatively couple to the inertial measurement unit, the software operative to utilize data output from a magnetometer associated with the inertial measurement unit and record a data set resembling an ellipsoid while the main platform rotates relative to the intermediate platform and while the final platform rotates relative to the intermediate platform, the software operative to fit a sphere to the data set and generate magnetometer correction calculations to account for distortions in the local magnetic field to normalize future data output from the magnetometer.

[0006] In a more detailed embodiment of the second aspect, the main platform is stationary. In yet another more detailed embodiment, the main platform at least partially houses a motor configured to rotate the intermediate platform relative to the main platform. In a further detailed embodiment, the software is operative to utilize a first data set output from an accelerometer associated with the inertial measurement unit while the inertial measurement unit is in a first stationary position and to generate an accelerometer correction calculation that utilizes a second data set output from the accelerometer at a second stationary position different from the first stationary position to normalize future data output from the accelerometer. In yet another detailed embodiment, the first stationary position corresponds to the main platform being in a first fixed position relative to the intermediate platform and the final platform being in a second fixed position relative to the intermediate platform, and the second stationary position corresponds to at least one of the main platform being in a third fixed position relative to the intermediate platform and the final platform being in a fourth fixed position relative to the intermediate platform. In a more detailed embodiment, the final platform comprises a plurality of cages, each of the plurality of cages configured to mount to at least one of the plurality of inertial measurement units.

[0007] A third aspect of the present invention provides a method for calibrating an inertial measurement unit having a magnetometer, the method comprising: (a) rotating a first inertial measurement unit having a first inertial measurement unit about a first axis of rotation and a second axis of rotation, while simultaneously receiving raw local magnetic field data from the first magnetometer, the first axis of rotation being perpendicular to the second axis of rotation; (b) applying a uniformity calculation to the raw local magnetic field data to calculate a distortion of the local magnetic field; and (c) normalizing the raw local magnetic field data received from the magnetometer by capturing the calculated distortion of the local magnetic field to provide accurate local magnetic field data.

[0008] In a more detailed embodiment of the third aspect, the first inertial measurement unit includes a first accelerometer, and the method further includes the steps of (i) holding the first inertial measurement unit stationary at a first three-dimensional position while simultaneously receiving raw accelerometer data from the first accelerometer; (ii) holding the first inertial measurement unit stationary at a second three-dimensional position while simultaneously receiving raw accelerometer data from the first accelerometer, the second three-dimensional position being different from the first three-dimensional position; and (iii) normalizing the data received from the first accelerometer to reflect zero acceleration when the first accelerometer is stationary. In yet another more detailed embodiment, the first inertial measurement unit includes a second accelerometer, and the method further includes the steps of (i) holding the second inertial measurement unit stationary at a third three-dimensional position while simultaneously receiving raw accelerometer data from the second accelerometer when the first accelerometer is held stationary, (ii) holding the second inertial measurement unit stationary at a fourth three-dimensional position while simultaneously receiving raw accelerometer data from the second accelerometer when the first accelerometer is held stationary, the fourth three-dimensional position being different from the third three-dimensional position, and (iii) normalizing the data received from the second accelerometer to reflect zero acceleration when the second accelerometer is stationary. In a further detailed embodiment, the raw local magnetic field data is representative of a three-dimensional ellipsoid and the accurate local magnetic field data is representative of a three-dimensional sphere. In yet another detailed embodiment, the uniform calculation includes fitting a sphere to the raw local magnetic field data, and normalizing the raw local magnetic field data includes subtracting the calculated distortion from the raw local magnetic field data to provide accurate local magnetic field data. In a more detailed embodiment, the method further includes a second inertial measurement unit having its own first accelerometer. In a more detailed embodiment, the second inertial measurement unit has its own first accelerometer.

[0009] A fourth aspect of the present invention provides a method for identifying a surgical instrument when coupled to an inertial measurement unit, the method comprising: (a) attaching the inertial measurement unit to one of a plurality of surgical instruments, each of the plurality of surgical instruments having a unique interface; and (b) identifying one of the plurality of surgical instruments in response to reading the unique interface by sending a signal to a processor communicatively coupled to the inertial measurement unit.

[0010] In a more detailed embodiment of the fourth aspect, the inertial measurement unit is operatively coupled to a plurality of switches, the unique interface engages at least one of the plurality of switches, and reading the unique interface includes the processor determining which of the plurality of switches the unique interface has engaged. In yet another more detailed embodiment, the processor is coupled to the inertial measurement unit, and the processor and the inertial measurement unit are housed in a common housing. In an even more detailed embodiment, the processor is remote from the inertial measurement unit, and the processor and the inertial measurement unit are not housed in a common housing.

[0011] A fifth aspect of the present invention provides a method of surgical navigation comprising: (a) generating acceleration data and magnetic data using a plurality of inertial measurement units; (b) calibrating the plurality of inertial measurement units in proximity to a surgical site; (c) aligning a relative position of a first and a second inertial measurement unit comprising the plurality of inertial measurement units, the relative position including attaching the first inertial measurement unit to an alignment tool that uniquely engages with the patient's anatomy at a specific position and orientation, and the relative position including attaching the second inertial measurement unit to the patient; (d) attaching the first inertial measurement unit to the aligned surgical tool; (e) repositioning the surgical tool and the first inertial measurement unit toward a surgical site associated with the patient's anatomy; and (f) providing visual feedback regarding at least one of a position and orientation of the surgical tool when the patient's anatomy is not visible or when the working end of the surgical tool is not visible.

[0012] A sixth aspect of the present invention provides a method of surgical navigation comprising: (a) generating acceleration data and magnetic data using a plurality of inertial measurement units; (b) calibrating the plurality of inertial measurement units in proximity to a surgical site; (c) aligning a relative position of a first and a second inertial measurement unit comprising the plurality of inertial measurement units, the first inertial measurement unit being attached to an alignment tool that uniquely engages with the patient's anatomy at a particular position and orientation, and the second inertial measurement unit being attached to the patient; (d) attaching the first inertial measurement unit to the aligned surgical tool; (e) repositioning the surgical tool and the first inertial measurement unit toward a surgical site associated with the patient's anatomy; and (f) providing visual feedback regarding a position and orientation of the surgical tool relative to a predetermined surgical plan, the predetermined surgical plan identifying at least one of a range of allowable positions and a range of allowable orientations that the surgical tool may occupy.

[0013] A seventh aspect of the present invention provides a method for generating a trauma plate for a particular bone, the method comprising: (a) accessing a database comprising a plurality of three-dimensional bone models of the particular bone; (b) evaluating features comprising at least one of a longitudinal contour and a cross-sectional contour for each of the plurality of three-dimensional bone models, the longitudinal contour being along a dominant dimension of the plurality of three-dimensional bone models; (c) clustering the plurality of three-dimensional bone models based on the evaluated features to generate a plurality of clusters, the plurality of clusters being numerically less than 10% of the plurality of three-dimensional bone models; and (d) generating a trauma plate for each of the plurality of clusters.

[0014] In a more detailed embodiment of the seventh aspect, generating a trauma plate for each of the plurality of clusters includes avoiding soft tissue attachment to a particular bone by selection of fixation points. In yet another more detailed embodiment, the plurality of three-dimensional bone models include at least one common point, the common point including at least one of gender, ethnicity, age range, and height range. In a further detailed embodiment, generating a trauma plate for each of the plurality of clusters includes incorporating at least one of an average longitudinal profile and an average cross-sectional profile of the particular cluster.

[0015] An eighth aspect of the present invention provides a method for generating a patient-specific trauma plate for a particular bone, the method comprising the steps of: (a) acquiring patient-specific image data of an injured or degenerated particular bone; (b) using the patient-specific image data to analyze at least one of portions where the particular bone is not present and portions where the particular bone is present; (c) generating a patient-specific virtual bone model of the particular bone in an integrated state including bone not visible in the patient-specific image data; (d) evaluating a contour of the patient-specific virtual bone model; and (e) generating a patient-specific trauma plate using the patient-specific virtual bone model.

[0016] A ninth aspect of the present invention is a method for kinematically tracking movement of a patient's anatomy using an inertial measurement unit, comprising the steps of: (a) mounting a first inertial measurement unit external to a first anatomical feature of interest of the patient; (b) mounting a second inertial measurement unit external to a second anatomical feature of interest of the patient; (c) aligning a position of the first anatomical feature of the patient to a virtual model of the first anatomical feature of interest of the patient using the first inertial measurement unit; (d) aligning a position of the second anatomical feature of the patient to the virtual model of the second anatomical feature of interest of the patient using the second inertial measurement unit; (e) dynamically correcting a position of the first anatomical feature of the patient with the virtual model of the first anatomical feature using the first inertial measurement unit; and (f) dynamically correcting a position of the first anatomical feature of the patient with the virtual model of the first anatomical feature using the second inertial measurement unit. and dynamically correcting a position of a second anatomical feature of interest of the patient with the virtual model of the second anatomical feature. [Brief description of the drawings]

[0017] [Figure 1] FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of the overall process of generating mass-customized and patient-specific templates from incomplete anatomy. [Diagram 2] FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram detailing how new anatomical structures are added to the statistical atlas and correspondences are generated. [Diagram 3] FIG. 3 is a schematic diagram of a multi-resolution 3D registration algorithm corresponding to the multi-resolution 3D registration of FIG. 2. [Figure 4] FIG. 1 illustrates multi-scale registration of feature points using multi-scale features. [Diagram 5] FIG. 4 shows a low-level decomposition of the multi-resolution registration outlined in FIG. [Figure 6] FIG. 13 is a graphical representation of capturing population variation during generation of matching. [Figure 7] FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of the whole bone reconstruction process with incomplete, deformed, or comminuted anatomy. [Figure 8]FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of the defect classification process that generates a defect template. [Figure 9] FIG. 1 shows a graphical example of the existing AAOS classification of acetabular defects. [Figure 10] FIG. 1 shows a graphic example of the existing Paprosky acetabular defect classification. [Figure 11] FIG. 1 shows a graphical example of existing Paprosky acetabular defect subclassifications. [Figure 12] FIG. 8 is a table and associated figures showing pelvic reconstruction results for various defects, which is an exemplary application and validation of the whole bone reconstruction shown in FIG. 7. [Figure 13] Figure 7 shows distance maps of the mean RMS error of pelvic reconstruction for different defects validating the accuracy of whole bone reconstruction. [Figure 14] A 3D model representation of a patient suffering from a severe pelvic tear is shown on the left, and an example of a 3D model of the patient's pelvis is shown on the right. [Figure 15] A comparison of the reconstructed left side model and the original patient model, as well as left and right anatomy. [Figure 16] FIG. 13 shows a distance map between the reconstructed model and a mirror image of the reconstructed pelvis model. [Figure 17] Figure 1. Patient with complete pelvic tear and reconstruction result with RMS error of 1.8 mm. [Figure 18] FIG. 1 shows the reconstruction result of a portion of the skull and the average distance map of the reconstruction error. [Figure 19] FIG. 1 shows the results of reconstruction of a comminuted femur. [Figure 20] FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of the process for creating a patient-specific reconstructive implant. [Figure 21] FIG. 21 is a schematic diagram of the implant production process shown in FIG. 20. [Figure 22] FIG. 1 is a process flow diagram illustrating the various steps of reconstructing the entire anatomy from the incomplete anatomy of a patient and creating a patient-specific cup implant for a pelvic tear. [Figure 23] FIG. 13 is a graphical representation of a patient-specific placement guide for a patient-specific acetabular implant. [Figure 24] This is an image examining the relationship between the three attachment sites of the implant and the cup orientation for mass customization. [Diagram 25] 13 is an image showing a sequence for mass customization of an acetabular cage in accordance with the present disclosure. [Figure 26] FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of a method for manufacturing mass-produced custom acetabular components using a modular design. [Figure 27] FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of a process for producing a patient-specific hip stem for reconstructive surgery. [Figure 28] FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of the mass-customized implant production process. [Figure 29] FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram illustrating the process of generating both mass-customized and patient-specific hip implants using a statistical atlas. [Diagram 30] FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram illustrating the process of generating both mass-customized and patient-specific hip implants using a statistical atlas. [Diagram 31] FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram outlining the process of designing population-specific hip stem components. [Diagram 32] FIG. 13 is a graphical representation of where the proximal femoral landmarks were placed. [Diagram 33] FIG. 3D femur model of the mid-femoral canal and femoral constriction along the length of the femur. [Diagram 34] FIG. 13 is a graphical representation of where the proximal femoral axis is placed. [Diagram 35] FIG. 13 is a graphical representation of mid-cervical calculation positioning. [Diagram 36] FIG. 1 is a graphical representation of the two points used to define the proximal femoral anatomical axis. [Figure 37] FIG. 13 is a graphical representation of 3D proximal femoral measurements. [Figure 38] FIG. 1 shows exemplary Dorr ratios in 2D generally (X-ray). [Figure 39] FIG. 13 is a graphic representation of the B / A ratio at the IM isthmus. [Diagram 40] FIG. 13 is a graphical representation of IM pipe measurements. [Diagram 41] FIG. 1 shows contours and fitting circles. [Diagram 42] FIG. 13 is a graphical representation of measurements to determine IM canal femoral radius ratio. [Diagram 43] FIG. 1 shows two femur models showing the effect of changing radius ratio, with the left radius ratio at 0.69 and the right radius ratio at 0.38. [Diagram 44] Plots of BMD vs. RRFW for men and women, as well as the best linear fit for each data set (male, female). [Diagram 45] FIG. 1 is a graphical representation of the medial contour, neck axis, and head point of the proximal femur prior to alignment. [Figure 46] FIG. 13 is a graphical representation of anatomical axis alignment with the Z direction. [Figure 47] FIG. 13 is a graphical representation of the medial contour aligned with the femoral neck fulcrum. [Figure 48] FIG. 13 is a graphical representation of various models generated using interpolation between models and illustrating the smoothness of the interpolation. [Figure 49] FIG. 1 is a graphical and pictorial representation of three-dimensional mapping of bone density. [Figure 50] Radiographic representation of IM width at three levels as well as proximal axis, head offset, and femoral head. [Figure 51] FIG. 13 is a plot of proximal angle versus head offset. [Figure 52] FIG. 13 is a plot of proximal angle versus head height. [Figure 53] FIG. 13 is a plot of head offset versus head height. [Figure 54] FIG. 13 shows a histogram of proximal angles. [Figure 55] FIG. 13 shows cluster plots for females and males for head offset and calcar diameter. [Figure 56] FIG. 13 shows plots of female and male clusters for head offset and proximal angle. [Figure 57] FIG. 13 shows a histogram of head offset. [Figure 58] FIG. 13 is a diagram showing a histogram of IM sizes. [Figure 59] FIG. 1 is a graphical representation of female measurements for the proximal femur. [Figure 60] FIG. 1 is a graphical representation of male measurements for the proximal femur. [Figure 61] FIG. 1 is a graphical representation of female measurements of greater trochanteric height. [Figure 62] FIG. 1 is a graphical representation of male measurements of greater trochanteric height. [Figure 63] 1 is a diagram and table showing a graphic representation of the differences in intramedullary canal shape between men and women. [Figure 64] FIG. 1 shows a female femur and intramedullary canal representative of normal bone density and quality. [Figure 65] FIG. 1 shows a female femur and intramedullary canal representative of subnormal bone density and quality. [Figure 66] FIG. 1 shows a female femur and intramedullary canal representative of osteoporosis. [Figure 67] FIG. 13 shows a histogram containing an interpolated data set of head offsets. [Figure 68] FIG. 1 shows a histogram containing a dataset of tube sizes. [Figure 69] FIG. 1 shows the medial contour and head centre distribution of different femoral groups. [Figure 70] FIG. 13 is a plot showing the distribution of head offsets for a group of femurs of a particular size. [Figure 71] 1 is a table reflecting anteversion angle measurements for men and women. [Figure 72] This is a photograph showing how to measure the front-to-back height. [Figure 73] FIG. 13 plots femoral head height versus anterior-posterior head height for the fulcrum for males and females, including best linear fits for each data set (male, female). [Figure 74] FIG. 13 plots femoral head height versus anterior-posterior head height relative to the anatomical axis midpoint for males and females, including best-fit linear fits for each data set (male, female). [Figure 75] FIG. 13 is a graphical representation of parameters used to create a hip stem implant family based on gender and / or ethnicity according to the present disclosure, and shows mass-customized implant shape parameters of femoral stem components extracted by clustering. [Figure 76] 1 shows assembled and exploded views of a primary hip stem. [Figure 77] 1A and 1B are assembled and exploded views of a revision hip stem. [Figure 78] FIG. 13 is a graphical representation of plane surface points and their use to isolate acetabular cup shapes in accordance with the present disclosure. [Figure 79] FIG. 13 is a graphical representation of multiple virtual 3D acetabular cup anatomical templates created in accordance with the present disclosure. [Figure 80] FIG. 1 is a graphical representation of an anatomical acetabular cup and femoral stem ball shape showing multiple cup radii. [Figure 81] A two-dimensional representation of the curvature that fits between the acetabular cup and the femoral head. [Figure 82] FIG. 13 is a graphical representation of the mapping contour of the pelvis used in cross-sectional analysis of the acetabular cup. [Figure 83] FIG. 13 is a graphical representation of the automated detection of the transverse acetabular ligament according to the present disclosure as a method for determining the orientation of an acetabular implant cup. [Figure 84]FIG. 13 is a graphical representation of the sequence of extraction of pore shapes and sizes that match the patient's bone anatomy according to a micro-computed tomography scan of the patient. [Figure 85] 1A-1D illustrate an exemplary process for creating a pet-specific implant and cutting guide in accordance with the present disclosure. [Figure 86] FIG. 1 illustrates an exemplary process for creating a mass-customized orthopedic implant for a pet using a statistical atlas, according to the present disclosure. [Figure 87] FIG. 1 illustrates an exemplary process for generating a patient-specific cutting and placement instrument for an implant system according to the present disclosure. [Figure 88] FIG. 87 illustrates an exemplary process for non-rigid registration and creation of patient-specific 3D pelvis and proximal femur models from X-ray in accordance with the present disclosure. [Figure 89] 1 is a photograph and multiple x-ray images used in the reconstruction of the pelvis and proximal femur in accordance with the present disclosure. [Figure 90] FIG. 88 illustrates an exemplary process for automated segmentation of the pelvis and proximal femur from the MRI and CT scans shown in FIG. 87. [Figure 91] FIG. 88 illustrates an exemplary process for automated segmentation of complex fractured biological structures from MRI or CT scans as outlined in FIG. 87. [Figure 92] 1A-1C illustrate an exemplary process for virtual templating of both an acetabular cup and a femoral stem for use in a hip replacement surgery. [Figure 93] FIG. 93 shows an exemplary process for automatic replacement of a femoral stem with distal fixation, which is a specific example of the general process outlined in FIG. 92. [Figure 94] FIG. 93 shows an exemplary process for automatic replacement of a femoral stem with a press fit and three contact points, which is a specific example of the general process outlined in FIG. 92. [Figure 95] FIG. 13 is a graphical representation of automatic pelvis labeling in accordance with the present disclosure. [Figure 96] FIG. 13 is a graphical representation of automatic cup orientation and placement in accordance with the present disclosure. [Figure 97] 1 is an image including a series of x-rays overlaid with measurement and calculation data for acetabular cup and femoral stem placement assessment in accordance with the present disclosure. [Figure 98] FIG. 13 is a graphical representation of the assessment of acetabular cup and femoral stem placement to ensure full limb length restoration and orientation in accordance with the present disclosure. [Figure 99] 13 is a screenshot of a pre-planning interface for evaluating and modifying implant placement and sizing in accordance with the present disclosure. [Figure 100] 1A-1C include a series of sequential images illustrating an exemplary process of resecting and placing a femoral stem using patient-specific instruments. [Figure 101] 1A-1C include a series of sequential images illustrating an exemplary process of drilling and placing an acetabular cup using a patient-specific guide. [Figure 102] 14A-14D illustrate a series of 3D virtual maps of the acetabulum that can be used to generate patient-specific instrumentation and locking mechanisms in accordance with the present disclosure. [Figure 103] FIG. 1 illustrates an exemplary process for using an inertial measurement unit as part of surgical navigation during hip replacement surgery. [Figure 104] 1 is a series of sequential images illustrating an exemplary process of using an inertial measurement unit as part of surgical navigation during a hip replacement surgery. [Figure 105] 1 is a series of sequential images illustrating an exemplary process of using an inertial measurement unit as part of femur-specific surgical navigation during hip replacement surgery. [Figure 106] 1A-1C are graphical representations of exemplary instruments and processes for calibrating the position of an inertial measurement unit for subsequent pelvis-specific surgical navigation during hip replacement surgery. [Figure 107] FIG. 13 is an exemplary process flow diagram for preparing for and using an inertial measurement unit during a surgical procedure, as well as assessing surgical outcomes through inertial measurements after the surgical procedure is completed. [Figure 108] FIG. 1 is a series of images showing inertial measurement unit pods / housings attached to various instruments as part of facilitating surgical navigation during a surgical procedure. [Fig. 109] 1 is a series of images showing an Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) pod / housing, including photographs showing calibration of the IMU with respect to its position relative to a patient's anatomy, photographs showing surgical navigation of a reamer using the IMU pod, and photographs showing surgical navigation of an acetabular cup impactor using the IMU pod. [Figure 110] Figure 1 shows a photo within a photo illustrating the use of an IMU pod in conjunction with an acetabular cup impactor, as well as a graphical interface (inset) showing a model of the patient's anatomy (in this case the pelvis) and the distal end of the impactor color-coded to ensure the orientation of the impactor is aligned with the preliminary planned orientation of the surgery. [Figure 111] 1 is a photograph of an IMU utilized in accordance with the present disclosure, along with a reference ruler characterizing the relative dimensions of the IMU. [Figure 112] FIG. 1 is an exemplary process flow diagram for producing trauma plates and fixation devices for a given population according to the present disclosure. [Figure 113] 1 is a graphical image of an average bone showing localization points on the bone surface that define the shape of the bone or trauma plate by their location in a population of bones in a statistical atlas. [Fig. 114] Graphic images of bones showing the propagation of plate tracks through a population (shown here in one example). [Figure 115] 13 is a graphic image showing the extraction of the midline curve of the bone / trauma plate after the propagation of the plate trajectory. [Fig. 116] FIG. 13 is a graphical representation of the results of calculating the 3D radius of curvature (parameter) of the trauma plate midline curve. [Figure 117] FIG. 13 is a graphical representation of how the length of the trauma plate is calculated after the propagation of the plate trajectory. [Figure 118]FIG. 13 is a graphical representation of how to calculate mid-plate width of a trauma plate after propagation of the plate trajectory. [Figure 119] FIG. 13 is a graphical representation of how the plate cross-sectional radius of a trauma plate is calculated after the propagation of the plate trajectory. [Figure 120] FIG. 13 plots plate size data used to determine optimal number of clusters. [Figure 121] FIG. 111 includes 2D and 3D plots of the plate size data used to generate clusters (identified as "Clustering" in FIG. 111). [Figure 122] FIG. 111 shows a number of images reflecting a parameterization of plate size (identified as "parameterization curve" and "model generation" in FIG. 111). [Figure 123] 13 is an exemplary image showing a bone / trauma plate of a particular cluster being fitted to one of the bone models to assess the conformance / fit with the cluster. [Figure 124] FIG. 13 shows a 3D surface distance map reflecting the distance between the underside of the bone / trauma plate surface and the surface of the bone model selected for evaluation of plate fitting. [Fig. 125] FIG. 14 Validation of design plate on cadaver to avoid muscle and ligament impingement. [Fig. 126] 1 is an exemplary diagram reflecting interactions between elements of an exemplary patient-adapted clavicle trauma system in accordance with the present disclosure; FIG. [Figure 127] FIG. 127 is an exemplary process flow diagram of the preliminary planning element shown in FIG. 126. [Figure 128] FIG. 127 is an exemplary process flow diagram for intraoperative guidance shown in FIG. 126 (in this case using fluoroscopy). [Figure 129] FIG. 2 is a fluoroscopic image of the clavicle adjacent to a superior view of the clavicle, partially including the surrounding anatomy. [Fig. 130] FIG. 127 is an exemplary process flow diagram for intraoperative guidance shown in FIG. 126 (in this case using ultrasound). [Fig. 131]FIG. 13 shows a graphical display matching radiographic or fluoroscopic images taken during range of motion, as well as plots of post-operative assessment of shoulder kinematics using one or more inertial measurement units. [Fig. 132] FIG. 2 is a three-dimensional view of a pair of clavicles including the surrounding anatomy. [Fig. 133] 1A-1C are two different views showing a clavicle model and the points along the bone model used to identify the clavicle midline curvature. [Fig. 134] FIG. 2 shows a clavicle model and muscle attachment locations on the bone model. [Fig. 135] FIG. 1 shows a series of surface maps of average clavicle models for men and women across given populations and the degree of shape differences within each population. [Fig. 136] A pair of three-dimensional views of the correlated contours of the clavicle including muscle attachment sites. [Fig. 137] A series of cross-sectional views of the clavicle taken across male and female populations showing clavicle contour differences at various muscle attachment sites. [Figure 138] FIG. 1 is a series of cross-sectional views of clavicles taken across a population of males and females showing clavicle contour differences along the length of the clavicle. [Fig. 139] FIG. 1 shows left and right clavicle models generated in response to population data in a statistical atlas that reflect morphological differences between the left and right clavicles. [Fig. 140] FIG. 13 illustrates a clavicle model fitted with a superior lateral plate (left), plate midline curve (center), and midline plate curvature showing the radius of curvature (right) in accordance with the present disclosure. [Fig. 141] FIG. 1 shows the superolateral plate clusters of male and female clavicle populations (Table 1 contains data on this). [Fig. 142] FIG. 13 shows a clavicle model fitted with an anterior mid-diaphyseal 7h plate (left), plate midline curve (center), and midline plate curvature showing a single radius of curvature (right) in accordance with the present disclosure. [Fig. 143]FIG. 2 shows the anterior mid-diaphyseal 7h plate cluster of male and female clavicle populations (Table 2 contains data on this). [Fig. 144] FIG. 13 illustrates a clavicle model fitted with a top central diaphyseal plate (left), plate midline curve (center), and midline plate curvatures showing various radii of curvature (right) in accordance with the present disclosure. [Fig. 145] FIG. 1 shows the upper mid-diaphyseal plate clusters of male and female clavicle populations (Table 3 contains data on this). [Fig. 146] FIG. 13 illustrates a clavicle model fitted with an anterolateral plate (left), plate midline curve (center), and midline plate curvatures showing various radii of curvature (right) in accordance with the present disclosure. [Fig. 147] FIG. 1 shows the anterolateral plate clusters of male and female clavicle populations (Table 4 contains data on this). [Fig. 148] FIG. 13 illustrates a clavicle model fitted with an anterior mid-diaphyseal long plate (left), plate midline curve (center), and midline plate curvatures showing various radii of curvature (right) in accordance with the present disclosure. [Figure 149] FIG. 1 shows the anterior mid-diaphyseal plate clusters of male and female clavicle populations (Table 5 contains data on this). [Fig. 150] FIG. 1 illustrates an exemplary process flow diagram for generating a customized plate placement guide for trauma reconstructive surgery in accordance with the present disclosure. [Fig. 151] FIG. 1 illustrates an exemplary process flow diagram for generating a customized cutting and placement guide for reconstructive surgery using bone grafts in accordance with the present disclosure. [Fig. 152] FIG. 13 is an exemplary process flow diagram for producing a trauma plate template and placement instrument in accordance with the present disclosure. [Fig. 153] FIG. 1 is an exemplary process flow diagram for producing a revision hip cage template and placement instrument in accordance with the present disclosure. [Fig. 154]FIG. 1 illustrates an exemplary process flow diagram for soft tissue and motion tracking of body anatomy using an inertial measurement unit in accordance with the present disclosure. [Fig. 155] 11A-11D are a pair of screenshots illustrating a kinematic software interface for identifying soft tissue points on a bone model and tracking soft tissue deformation in accordance with the present disclosure. [Fig. 156] Includes bone models of the femur, tibia, and fibula showing the points on each bone model where the ligaments (MCL, LCL) are attached, color coded to identify points with high or low likelihood of ligament attachment. [Fig. 157] Includes a bone model of the distal femur showing the points on each bone model where ligaments (ACL, PCL) are attached, and these points are color coded to identify points with high or low likelihood of ligament attachment. [Fig. 158] FIG. 1 includes a bone model of the proximal tibia showing the points on each bone model where ligaments (ACL, PCL) are attached, and these points are color coded to identify points of likely or unlikely ligament attachment. [Fig. 159] 1A-1D show an anterior view, a posterior view, and two side views of a 3D virtual model of a knee joint including ligament attachments according to the present disclosure. [Fig. 160] FIG. 159 shows modeling of the kinematic motion of the fully assembled knee joint model of FIG. 159 using fluoroscopic images. [Fig. 161] 13A-13C show distal femur and proximal tibia bone models reflecting real-time tracking of anatomical axes in accordance with the present disclosure; [Fig. 162] FIG. 1 includes a knee joint model of the range of motion and a reconstruction of the helical axis. [Fig. 163] FIG. 1 includes a knee joint bone model showing anatomical axes in the coronal plane. [Fig. 164] FIG. 1 illustrates a clinical examination of the knee joint using an inertial measurement unit to record motion data, in accordance with the present disclosure. [Fig. 165] FIG. 1 illustrates a clinical examination of the knee joint using an inertial measurement unit to record motion data, in accordance with the present disclosure. [Fig. 166] FIG. 1 illustrates a clinical examination of the knee joint using an inertial measurement unit to record motion data, in accordance with the present disclosure. [Fig. 167] FIG. 1 illustrates a clinical examination of the knee joint using an inertial measurement unit to record motion data, in accordance with the present disclosure. [Fig. 168] FIG. 1 illustrates a clinical examination of the knee joint using an inertial measurement unit to record motion data, in accordance with the present disclosure. [Fig. 169] FIG. 1 illustrates a clinical examination of the knee joint using an inertial measurement unit to record motion data, in accordance with the present disclosure. [Fig. 170] FIG. 1 illustrates a clinical examination of the knee joint using an inertial measurement unit to record motion data, in accordance with the present disclosure. [Fig. 171] FIG. 1 illustrates a clinical examination of the knee joint using an inertial measurement unit to record motion data, in accordance with the present disclosure. [Fig. 172] FIG. 1 illustrates a clinical examination of the knee joint using an inertial measurement unit to record motion data, in accordance with the present disclosure. [Fig. 173] It includes a series of photographs, the first of which shows a patient fitted with a pair of Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) packages, a second of which shows the relative size of the IMU packages to the individual IMUs, and a third of which shows the relative size of the individual IMUs to a US quarter coin. [Fig. 174] 13 is a user interface screenshot showing a proximal tibia model providing feedback of load distribution as the patient's knee joint is captured in range of motion with dynamic updates based on input received from an inertial measurement unit in accordance with the present disclosure. [Fig. 175] Photograph of a patient's lower back showing separate Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs) placed on the L1 and L5 vertebrae to track the relative motion of each vertebra through the range of motion, and accompanying diagram showing that each IMU is capable of outputting data indicative of movement across three axes. [Fig. 176] FIG. 176 is a series of photographs showing the patient and IMU of FIG. 175 as the patient moves through a range of motion. [Fig. 177] FIG. 1 is a graphical representation of a process for determining the relative orientation of at least two bodies using inertial measurement unit data in accordance with the present disclosure. [Fig. 178] FIG. 1 includes a pair of plots showing the absolute change in orientation of the anatomical axes relative to the spinal cord (specifically L1 and L5) during lateral bending activities in a patient, where (A) the data plot is representative of a healthy patient and (B) the data plot is representative of a patient with spinal degeneration. [Fig. 179] FIG. 1 includes a pair of images, the first a top view of the proximal tibia and the second a front perspective view of the proximal tibia, shown along with a surgical navigation instrument used to ensure proper orientation and positioning of the tibial implant components through IMU normalization. [Fig. 180] FIG. 2 is a front perspective view of an exemplary inertial measurement unit calibration instrument according to the present disclosure. [Fig. 181] Local magnetic field maps (isometric, front, and top views) generated from data output from an inertial measurement unit before calibration (the top set of three plots resemble an ellipsoid) and after calibration (isometric, front, and top views) generated from data output from an inertial measurement unit (the bottom set of three plots resemble a sphere). [Fig. 182] A series of diagrams showing example positions of magnetometers associated with an inertial measurement unit (A) and showing what the detected magnetic field from the magnetometer should reflect when normalized to account for distortion (B) and the result of local distortion of the magnetic field at the magnetometer when no normalization is performed. [Fig. 183] FIG. 1 illustrates a series of protrusions on multiple surgical instruments, each with a unique top surface, allowing an inertial measurement unit processor to intelligently identify the surgical instrument to which the IMU is attached. [Fig. 184] FIG. 186 is a schematic diagram representing the IMU housing and showing the interaction between one of the protrusions of FIG. 185 and the bottom cavity of the IMU housing. [Fig. 185]FIG. 1 illustrates an exemplary process flow diagram for preparing a proximal humerus and implanting a humeral component as part of a shoulder replacement procedure using an inertial measurement unit in accordance with the present disclosure. [Fig. 186] FIG. 13 is an exemplary process flow diagram for creating a scapular socket and implanting a glenoid cup as part of a shoulder replacement procedure using an inertial measurement unit in accordance with the present disclosure. [Fig. 187] FIG. 13 is an exemplary process flow diagram for preparing a proximal humerus and implanting a humeral component as part of a reverse shoulder replacement procedure using an inertial measurement unit in accordance with the present disclosure. [Fig. 188] FIG. 13 is an exemplary process flow diagram for creating a scapular socket and implanting a glenoid ball as part of a reverse shoulder replacement procedure using an inertial measurement unit in accordance with the present disclosure. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

[0018] Exemplary embodiments of the present disclosure are described and illustrated below to cover various aspects of orthopedics, such as bone reconstruction and tissue reconstruction, patient-specific and mass-customized orthopedic implants, gender- and ethnic-specific orthopedic implants, cutting guides, trauma plates, bone graft cutting and placement guides, patient-specific instruments, etc. Of course, it will be apparent to those skilled in the art that the embodiments described below are exemplary in nature and may be reconfigured without departing from the scope and spirit of the present invention. However, for clarity and rigor, the exemplary embodiments described below may include optional steps, methods, and features that a person skilled in the art would recognize as not being required to fall within the scope of the present invention.

[0019] Whole body structure reconstruction With reference to FIGS. 1-8, reconstruction of deformed or incomplete anatomy is one of the complex problems facing healthcare providers. Loss of anatomy may be the result of birth conditions, tumors, disease, physical injury, or failed previous surgery. As part of treatment for various ailments, healthcare providers may find it advantageous to reconstruct or configure anatomy to facilitate treatment for a variety of conditions, such as, but not limited to, fractures / comminuted fractures, bone degeneration, orthopedic implant revisions, joint degeneration, and custom instrumentation design. For example, prior art hip reconstruction solutions require mirroring of a healthy patient's anatomy, which may not be an accurate reflection of healthy anatomy due to naturally occurring asymmetries, as shown in FIGS. 15-19.

[0020] The present disclosure provides systems and methods for bone reconstruction and tissue reconstruction. To perform this reconstruction, the systems and associated methods utilize anatomical images representative of one or more individuals. These images are processed to create a virtual three-dimensional (3D) tissue model or a series of virtual 3D tissue models that closely mimic the anatomy of interest. The systems and associated methods are then utilized to create casts and / or other devices (e.g., fixation devices, implantation devices, patient-specific implants, patient-specific surgical guides) for use in the reconstructive surgery.

[0021] As shown in FIG. 1, an example system flow overview begins with receiving input data representative of an anatomy. The anatomy may include an incomplete anatomy in the case of tissue degeneration or tissue absence as a result of genetic predisposition, a deformed anatomy as a result of genetic predisposition or environmental conditions, or shattered tissue as a result of destruction of one or more anatomy. The input anatomical data may include two-dimensional (2D) images or three-dimensional (3D) surface representations of the anatomy of interest, and may be in the form of a surface model or point cloud, for example. In situations where 2D images are used, these 2D images are utilized to construct a 3D virtual surface representation of the anatomy of interest. Those skilled in the art are familiar with utilizing 2D images of anatomy to construct a 3D surface representation. Thus, a detailed description of this process is omitted for the sake of brevity. By way of example, the input anatomical data may include one or more of X-ray, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), or any other imaging data capable of generating a 3D surface representation of the tissue of interest.

[0022] With reference to Figure 50 and Table I, in the context of X-ray images used to construct virtual 3D bone models, it has been found that the rotation of the bones at the time of capture plays an important role in the accurate construction of the model. In other words, if one wishes to edit X-ray images in a situation where bone rotation has occurred between images, the X-ray images need to be normalized to capture this bone rotation.

[0023] As an example, in the context of the proximal femur, it has been found that rotating the bone by 6° and 15° significantly changes measurements extracted from x-ray images. As an example, these measurements include, but are not limited to, proximal angle, head offset, and intramedullary canal width. As reflected in Table I, for the same femur x-rayed at zero degrees (i.e., starting point established on the first x-ray), 6° rotation and 15° rotation showed different proximal angle, head offset, and intramedullary canal width when measured using pixels with a pixel size of about 0.29 mm. Notably, the proximal angle increased with increasing rotation, as did the head offset, but this was not true for the intramedullary canal width. In this exemplary table, three cross sections were spaced along the longitudinal axis, each corresponding to a location where the intramedullary canal width was measured. As reflected in Table I, the intramedullary canal width at the same location changes with the rotation angle. As a result, as discussed in more detail below, when constructing a 3D virtual model of a bone using x-rays, it is necessary to account for rotational deviations to the extent that rotation of the bone occurs during imaging.

[0024] However, it is to be understood that the above is an exemplary description of anatomical structures that may be used in conjunction with the exemplary systems and methods, and is not intended to limit the use of the present systems in the disclosed manner with respect to other anatomical structures. As used herein, tissue includes bone, muscle, ligament, tendon, and any other finite type of structural material with a specific function in a multicellular organism. As a result, when discussing the exemplary systems and methods in the context of bone, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize the applicability of the systems and methods to other tissues.

[0025] Referring again to FIG. 1 , the input of bioanatomical data into the system goes to three modules, two of which involve processing the bioanatomical data (whole bone reconstruction module, patient-specific module), while the third (anomaly database module) classifies the bioanatomical data as part of a database. The first of the processing modules, the whole bone reconstruction module, processes the input bioanatomical data with data received from the statistical atlas module to generate a virtual 3D model of the bone in question. The 3D model is a complete normal reconstruction of the bone in question. The second of the processing modules, the patient-specific module, processes the input bioanatomical data with data received from the whole bone reconstruction module to generate one or more casts, fixation systems, graft molding instruments, and renderings, as well as one or more final orthopedic implants. The renderings represent a visualization of the reconstructed anatomy for feedback regarding the expected surgical outcome. More specifically, the patient-specific module is configured to generate a fully customized appliance designed to precisely fit the patient's unique anatomy, despite the patient's anatomy significantly deviating from normal. Additionally, the patient-specific module utilizes the virtual 3D reconstructed bone model from the whole bone reconstruction module to automatically identify anatomical regions and features (e.g., fitting regions and / or shapes) for device design parameters. In this manner, patient-specific data is used to define design parameters such that the output instrument and any implants precisely fit the patient's specific anatomy. Exemplary uses of the patient-specific module are discussed in more detail below. To better understand the system's functionality and processes, the modules of the system are described below, beginning with the statistical atlas module.

[0026] As shown in Figures 1 and 2, the statistical atlas module can be used to analyze one or more biological structures. A virtual 3D model of (e.g., bones) is recorded to capture the inherent anatomical variability in a given population. In an exemplary embodiment, the atlas records a mathematical representation of anatomical features of one or more anatomical structures, represented as an average representation and a variation about the average representation. By representing anatomical features as mathematical representations, the statistical atlas allows for automated measurement of anatomical structures, as well as reconstruction of missing anatomical structures, as discussed in more detail below.

[0027] To extract anatomical variations in common anatomical structures, the input anatomical data is compared against a common reference frame, usually referred to as a template 3D model or anatomical 3D template model, across the population. The template 3D model is visually represented on a graphic display as a 3D model that can be rotated or otherwise visually manipulated, but contains mathematical representations of the anatomical surface features / representations of all anatomical structures in the entire statistical atlas for the tissue in question (i.e., for a given bone, all properties of the bone are shared across the population of statistical atlases generated from the template 3D model). The template 3D model can be a combination of multiple anatomical representations or a single representation instance, and may represent the lowest entropy state of the statistical atlas. For each anatomical structure to be added to the statistical atlas (i.e., the input anatomical data), an anatomical 3D model is created and both the anatomical 3D model and the template 3D model are subjected to a normalization process.

[0028] The normalization process normalizes the anatomical 3D model to the scale of the template 3D model. The normalization process may involve scaling one or both of the anatomical 3D model and the template 3D model so that they have a common unit scale. After normalization of the anatomical 3D model and the template 3D model, shape features are available independent of scale (meaning size in this case) to render the normalized anatomical 3D model and the template 3D model scale invariant. After normalization is completed, both 3D models are processed through a scale space mapping and feature extraction sequence.

[0029] Scale space mapping and feature extraction is essentially a multi-resolution feature extraction process. In particular, the process extracts shape-specific features at multiple feature scales. First, multiple anatomical features are selected that represent each feature present in different scale spaces. Then, for each scale-space representation of the selected anatomical features, model-specific features are extracted. These extracted features are used to derive robust (with respect to noise) registration parameters between the template 3D model and the anatomical 3D model. Following this multi-resolution feature extraction process, the extracted data is processed through a multi-resolution 3D registration process.

[0030] 2-5, in the multi-resolution 3D registration process, the scale-space extracted features are used to perform an affine registration calculation between the anatomical 3D model and the template 3D model to align the two models. In particular, the anatomical 3D model and the template 3D model are processed by a rigid registration process. As shown in FIG. 5, the rigid registration process operates to align the anatomical 3D model and the template 3D model so that both models are in the same space without pose singularities. To align the 3D models, the centroids associated with each model are aligned. Also, the principal axes of each 3D model are aligned so that the principal orientations of both 3D models are the same. Finally, an iterative closest point calculation is performed to minimize the pose difference between the 3D models.

[0031] After the rigid registration, the 3D models are aligned using a similarity registration process. In this process, the normal-scale template 3D model and the anatomical 3D model are iteratively aligned by calculating a similarity transformation that best aligns the normal-scale features (i.e., ridges) of both the template 3D model and the anatomical 3D model. The iterative similarity alignment algorithm is a variant of iterative closest point. At each iteration, the translation and scale between the point pairs are calculated until convergence. The distance query calculated by the Kd-tree or some other space partitioning data structure is used to evaluate the pairwise matching or correspondence between the two sets of points. In particular, the ridges of both models are utilized to perform the matching point pair calculation process. In this exemplary illustration, the ridges represent the points on the 3D models where a single principal curvature has an extreme value along its line of curvature. As part of the matching point pair calculation process, points on the ridges of the 3D models that match each other are identified. A similarity transformation calculation process is then applied to the ridges of both 3D models to calculate the rotation, translation, and scale that best align the ridges of both models. This is followed by a point transformation process, which operates to apply the calculated rotation, translation, and scale to the ridges of the template 3D model. The root mean square error or distance error between each set of matched points is then calculated, followed by the change in relative root mean square error or distance error from the previous process. If the change in relative root mean square error or distance error is within a predefined threshold, the transformation process applies the final rotation, translation, and scale to the template 3D model.

[0032] The similarity registration process is followed by a joint registration process that receives input data from a scale-space feature process, which extracts features from the template 3D model and the anatomical 3D model in different scale spaces, where each scale space is defined by convolving the original anatomical 3D model with a Gaussian smoothing function.

[0033] The objective of the joint registration process is to match the "n" scale-space features of the template 3D model to the "m" scale-space features calculated on the anatomical 3D model. The difference in the number of features detected on the template 3D model and the anatomical 3D model is due to anatomical variations. This difference in the number of detected features may result in many relationships between the template 3D model and the anatomical 3D model. Therefore, performing two-way mutual feature matching accommodates such variations and achieves accurate matching between all mutual features. Specifically, a feature set is computed on the template 3D model in scale space. In this exemplary process, the feature set is a set of connection points that represent prominent anatomical structures (e.g., acetabular cup of the pelvis, spinal processes of the lumbar region). Similarly, a feature set is computed on the anatomical 3D model in scale space. The feature pair matching process matches the computed feature set on the template 3D model to the feature set on the anatomical 3D model by using shape descriptors (e.g., curvature, shape coefficients, etc.). The result of this process is a "nm" mapping of feature sets between the template 3D model and the anatomical 3D model. If necessary, a regrouping process is performed to regroup the matched feature sets into a single feature set (e.g., if two acetabular cups are detected, this process regroups the two into a single feature set). A computation process is then performed to calculate the correspondence between each point of the matched feature sets on the template 3D model and the anatomical 3D model. This is followed by an affine computational transformation process to calculate the rotation, translation, and shear that transform each matched feature set on the template 3D model to the corresponding feature set on the anatomical 3D model. The calculated affine transformation parameters (i.e., rotation, translation, and shear) are then used to transform the template 3D model. Finally, a rigid body alignment process is performed to align each matched feature set on the template 3D model and the anatomical 3D model.

[0034] The non-rigid registration process, which follows the joint registration and regular scale feature processes, matches all surface vertices on the template 3D model to vertices on the anatomical 3D model and calculates an initial correspondence. This correspondence is then used to calculate a deformation field that moves each vertex on the template 3D model to a matching point on the anatomical 3D model. The matching is between vertices of the same class (i.e., scale-space feature vertices, regular scale feature vertices, or non-feature vertices). In the context of the regular scale feature process, shape features on the template 3D model and the anatomical 3D model are calculated in the original scale space (ridges), which refers to the original input model.

[0035] Specifically, as part of the non-rigid registration process, scale-space features are computed on the template 3D model (TMssf) and the anatomical 3D model (NMssf). Each feature set on the template 3D model and the anatomical 3D model is grown by using "k" nearest points. An alignment process is also applied to the scale-space features of the template 3D model to match them with the corresponding features on the anatomical 3D model. Given two point clouds, reference (X) and translation (Y), the goal is to iteratively align the two point clouds to minimize the overall error criterion under the constraints of minimum relative root-mean-square error and maximum angle threshold. A realignment process is performed to align the feature set on the template 3D model against the matched set on the anatomical 3D model by using iterative closest points on a normal scale. After realignment, point correspondences are computed between points of each feature set on the template 3D model and the matched feature set on the anatomical 3D model. The matched points on the anatomical 3D model should have surface normal directions close to those of the template 3D model. The output is sent to the deformation field calculation step.

[0036] In parallel with the progress of the scale-space feature calculation, the non-feature points of the template 3D model (TMnfp) and the anatomical 3D model (NMnfp) or other point sets on the template 3D model surface that do not belong to the scale-space features or the normal scale features are processed by the correspondence calculation to calculate the point correspondence between the non-feature points on the template 3D model and the non-feature points on the anatomical 3D model. The matching points on the new model should have a surface normal direction close to the points of the template model. The output is sent to the deformation field calculation step.

[0037] In parallel with the progress of the scale-space feature computation, we also use AICP to align regular-scale features (i.e., ridges) on the template 3D model (TMnsf) to regular-scale features (i.e., ridges) on the anatomical 3D model (NMnsf). AICP is a variant of iterative closest point computation, which computes translation, rotation, and scale between sets of matching points at each iteration. After the alignment process, we perform a matching process.

[0038] A deformation process is applied to the output of the scale-space feature computation progress, the correspondence progress, and the alignment progress, where a deformation field is calculated to move each point on the template 3D model to a matching point on the anatomical 3D model.

[0039] A relaxation process is applied to the output of the non-rigid registration process to move the vertices of the template 3D model mesh closer to the surface of the anatomical 3D model after the multi-resolution registration step, and to smooth the output model. In particular, the template 3D model in normal space (TMns) and the anatomical 3D model in normal space (NMns) are processed by a correspondence calculation to calculate the vertices on the template 3D model that are closest to the anatomical 3D model by a normal constrained sphere search algorithm. In this calculation, a correspondence vector is generated from each vertex of the template 3D model and the matching vertex of the anatomical 3D model by using the closest vertices of both models, which may result in two or more matching points from the anatomical 3D model. By using the matching points of each vertex on the template 3D model, a weighted average of the matching points on the anatomical 3D model is calculated based on the Euclidean distance from the points and the matching points. At this point, each point on the template 3D model is moved using the calculated weighted average distance by updating the template 3D model using the weighted average. After the weight operation process, a relaxation process is performed for every point on the template model to find the closest point on the anatomical 3D model surface and move it to said point. Finally, a smoothing operation is performed on the deformed template 3D model to remove noise. After that, a free-form deformation process is applied to the obtained aligned 3D models (i.e., the template 3D model and the anatomical 3D model).

[0040] In the free-form deformation process, the surface of the template 3D model is morphed with the surface of the anatomical 3D model. More specifically, the surface of the template 3D model is iteratively moved between weighted points using mutually matching points on both the template 3D model and the anatomical 3D model surfaces.

[0041] With reference to FIG. 2 and FIG. 6, after the free-form deformation process, a correspondence calculation process is applied to the anatomical 3D model to determine the deviation between the anatomical 3D model and the morphed template 3D model. This correspondence calculation process refines the template 3D model from the free-form deformation step to perform the final matching of the selected landmark positions on the deformed template 3D model and the deformed anatomical 3D model. Thus, the correspondence calculation process calculates the size and shape variations between the 3D models and records them as deviations with respect to the average model. The output of this correspondence calculation process is the addition of a normalized anatomical 3D model and a revised template 3D model that are updated to capture the variations in the anatomical 3D model. In other words, the output of the process outlined in FIG. 2 is a normalized anatomical 3D model that has been modified to have properties (e.g., point correspondences) that match the revised template 3D model to facilitate whole-body structure reconstruction (e.g., whole-bone reconstruction).

[0042] With reference to FIG. 1 and FIG. 7, the input and anatomy data from the statistical atlas module goes to the full anatomy reconstruction module. By way of example, the anatomy of interest may be one or more bones. However, it is noted that anatomy other than bones may be reconstructed using the exemplary hardware, processes, and techniques described herein. In an exemplary embodiment, the full anatomy reconstruction module may receive input data related to an incomplete, deformed, or crushed pelvis. The input anatomical data may include two-dimensional (2D) images or three-dimensional (3D) surface representations of the anatomy of interest, and may be in the form of a surface model or point cloud, for example. In situations where 2D images are used, the 2D images are utilized to construct a 3D surface representation of the anatomy of interest. Those skilled in the art are familiar with utilizing 2D images of anatomy to construct a 3D surface representation. Thus, a detailed description of this process is omitted for the sake of brevity. By way of example, the input anatomical data may include one or more of X-ray, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), or any other imaging data capable of generating a 3D surface representation. As discussed in more detail below, this input anatomical data can be used for, but is not limited to, (1) starting points to identify the closest statistical atlas 3D bone model, (2) registration using the 3D surface vertex set, and (3) a final relaxation step for the reconstruction output.

[0043] As shown in FIG. 7, input anatomical data (e.g., a patient's bone model) is utilized to identify an anatomical model (e.g., a bone model) in the statistical atlas that is most similar to the anatomy of the patient in question. This step is illustrated in FIG. 3 as a search for the closest bone in the atlas. First, the patient's bone model is compared to the statistical atlas's bone models using one or more similarity criteria to identify the statistical atlas's bone model that is most similar to the patient's bone model. The result of this initial similarity criterion is the selection of a bone model from the statistical atlas to be used as an "initial guess" in a subsequent registration step. In the registration step, the patient's bone model is aligned to the selected atlas bone model (i.e., the initial guess's bone model) such that the output is a patient's bone model aligned with the atlas bone model. Following the registration step, the shape parameters of the aligned "initial guess" are optimized such that the shape matches the patient's bone shape.

[0044] Optimization of shape parameters (in this case from a statistical atlas) minimizes the error between the reconstruction and the patient bone model by using undeformed or existing bone regions. By varying the values ​​of the shape parameters, different anatomical shapes can be represented. This process is repeated at different scale spaces until convergence of the reconstructed shape is achieved (possibly measured as the relative surface change between iterations or the maximum number of allowed iterations).

[0045] A relaxation step is performed to morph the optimized tissue to best fit the patient's original 3D tissue model. Consistent with this exemplary case, the missing anatomy from the reconstructed pelvis model output by the convergence step is applied to the patient-specific 3D pelvis model to create a patient-specific 3D model of the reconstructed pelvis of the patient. More specifically, surface points on the reconstructed pelvis model are relaxed (i.e., morphed) directly onto the patient-specific 3D pelvis model to best fit the reconstructed shape to the patient-specific shape. The output of this step is a fully reconstructed patient-specific 3D tissue model representing what should be the patient's normal / complete anatomy.

[0046] 1, the anomaly database serves as data input and training for the defect classification module. In particular, the anomaly database contains data specific to abnormal anatomical features, including anatomical surface delineations and associated clinical and demographic data.

[0047] 1 and 8, the defect classification module receives input anatomical data (i.e., 3D surface representations or data from which a 3D surface representation can be generated) representing abnormal / incomplete tissue and a fully reconstructed patient-specific 3D tissue model from an anomaly database. The anatomical data from the anomaly database may be an incomplete anatomy in the case of tissue degeneration or tissue absence as a result of genetic traits, a deformed anatomy as a result of genetic traits or environmental conditions (e.g., reoperation, disease, etc.), or a shattered tissue as a result of destruction of one or more anatomy. By way of example, the input anatomical data may include one or more of X-ray, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), or any other imaging data from which a 3D surface representation can be generated.

[0048] The defect classification module draws multiple anomaly 3D surface representations from the anomaly database combined with normal 3D representations of the anatomical structures in question to create a quantitative defect classification scheme. This defect classification scheme is used to create a "template" for each defect class or cluster. More generally, the defect classification module classifies anatomical defects into classes of closely related defects (representing defects with similar shape, clinical, appearance, or other characteristics) to facilitate the generation of medical solutions to address these defects. The defect classification module uses software and hardware to automatically classify defects as a means of eliminating or reducing discrepancies between preoperative data and intraoperative observer visualization. Traditionally, preoperative x-rays were taken preoperatively as a means of qualitatively analyzing the extent of the need for anatomical reconstruction, which resulted in haphazard preoperative planning. Currently, the extent of the anatomical structure defect is finalized intraoperatively by the observer, and it has been concluded many times that preoperative planning based on x-rays was poor or incomplete. As a result, the present defect classification module improves upon current classification schemes by reducing the inter- and intra-observer variability associated with defect classification, as well as providing quantitative criteria for classifying new defect cases.

[0049] As part of the defect classification module, the module may take as input one or more classification types to use as initial conditions. For example, in the context of the pelvis, the defect classification module may use the method described in D'Antonio et al. of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) as a basis for classification of pelvic bones. A bone defect classification structure may be used as the corresponding input defect feature. This structure includes four different classes: (1) Type I corresponding to partial osteoporosis, (2) Type II corresponding to cavitary osteoporosis, (3) Type III corresponding to combined partial and cavitary osteoporosis, and (4) Type IV corresponding to pelvic fracture. Alternatively, the defect classification module may be programmed with a Paprosky bone defect classification structure, which is graphically shown in FIG. 10 for the pelvis. This structure includes three different classes: (1) Type I corresponding to auxiliary rim without osteolysis, (2) Type II corresponding to distorted hemisphere with intact auxiliary column and upper medial border or lateral displacement less than 2 cm, and (3) Type III corresponding to severe ischiolysis with superior displacement more than 2 cm and Kohler's line broken or intact. Furthermore, the defect classification module may be programmed with a modified Paprosky bone defect classification structure. The structure includes six different classes: (1) Type 1, corresponding to a support rim with no component movement, (2) Type 2A, corresponding to a distorted hemisphere with less than 3 cm of superior translation, (3) Type 2B, corresponding to a larger hemisphere distortion with less than 1 / 3 of the rim circumference and the dome remaining supported, (4) Type 2C, corresponding to an intact rim, medial translation of Kohler's line, and a supported dome, (5) Type 3A, corresponding to severe ischiolysis with more than 3 cm of superior translation and intact Kohler's line, and (6) Type 3B, corresponding to severe ischiolysis with more than 3 cm of superior translation, broken Kohler's line, and rim defect of more than half the circumference. The defect classification module uses the output classification type and parameters to compare the anatomical data with the reconstructed data to identify the classification type that corresponds to the assigned classification obtained by the most similar anatomical data.

[0050] As a first step, the statistical atlas addition step generates a correspondence between the normal atlas 3D bone model and the abnormal 3D bone model. More specifically, the 3D bone models are compared to identify the bones of the normal 3D model that are not present in the abnormal 3D model. In an exemplary embodiment, missing / abnormal bones are identified by comparing the points on the surface of each 3D bone model and generating a list of discrete points on the surface of the normal 3D bone model that are not present on the abnormal 3D bone model. The system may also record and list (i.e., identify) those surface points that are common between the two models, or informally note that all other points are common to both bone models (i.e., both the normal and abnormal bone models) unless they are recorded as points that are not present on the abnormal 3D bone model. Thus, the output of this step is the abnormal 3D bone model along with the statistical atlas correspondence and a list of features (points) from the normal atlas 3D bone model that indicate whether the feature (point) is present or missing in the abnormal 3D bone model.

[0051] After generating the correspondence between the normal atlas 3D bone model (generated from the whole bone reconstruction module) and the abnormal 3D bone model (generated from the input anatomical data), the missing / abnormal regions from the abnormal 3D bone model are located on the normal atlas 3D bone model. In other words, the normal atlas 3D bone model is compared with the abnormal 3D bone model to identify and record the missing bones from the abnormal 3D bone model that are present in the normal atlas 3D bone model. The localization can be performed in various ways, such as, but not limited to, curvature comparison, surface area comparison, and point cloud area comparison. Finally, in an exemplary embodiment, the missing / abnormal bones are located as a set of boundary points that identify the geometric boundary of the missing / abnormal region.

[0052] Using the boundary points, the defect classification module extracts features from the missing / abnormal regions using the input clinical data. In an exemplary embodiment, the extracted features may include shape information, volume information, or any other information used to describe the overall characteristics of the defective (i.e., missing or abnormal) regions. These features may be refined based on existing clinical data, such as the current defect classification data or patient clinical information (demographics, medical history, etc.) that is not necessarily related to anatomical features. The output of this step is a mathematical descriptor representative of the defective regions that is used in a subsequent step of grouping similar tissue (e.g., bone) anomalies.

[0053] The mathematical descriptors are clustered or grouped based on statistical analysis. In particular, the descriptors are statistically analyzed to identify unique defect classes within a given population by comparison with other descriptors from other patients / cadavers. It is clear that this classification is premised on multiple descriptors from multiple patients / cadavers that improves classification and identification of discrete groups as the number of patients / cadavers increases. The output of this statistical analysis is a set of defect classes that are used to classify new input anatomical data and determine the number of templates.

[0054] The output of the defect classification module goes to a template module. In an exemplary embodiment, the template module includes data specific to each defect classification identified by the defect classification module. As an example, each template of a given defect classification includes a surface description of the defective bone, the location of the defect, and measurements related to the defective bone. This template data may be in the form of surface shape data, point cloud description, one or more curvature profiles, dimensional data, and physical quantity data. The output of the template module and statistical atlas is utilized by a mass customization module to enable the design, testing, and manufacturing of mass-customized implants, fixation devices, instruments, or molds. Exemplary utilization of the mass customization module is discussed in more detail below.

[0055] Patient-specific reconstructive implants With reference to FIG. 1 and FIG. 20, an exemplary process and system for generating a patient-specific orthopedic implant guide and associated patient-specific orthopedic implant for a patient suffering from a defective, deformed, and / or comminuted anatomy will be described. For purposes of exemplary description, a total hip arthroplasty for a patient with a deformed anatomy will be described. However, it will be understood that the exemplary process and system is applicable to any orthopedic implant suitable for patient-specific customization in cases where a defective or deformed anatomy exists. For example, the exemplary process and system is applicable to shoulder and knee replacements where bone degeneration (defective anatomy), bone deformity, or comminuted fractures exist. As a result, although a hip implant is discussed below, one skilled in the art will understand that the system and process is applicable to other orthopedic implants, guides, instruments, etc., for use in primary orthopedic surgery or revision surgery.

[0056] Pelvic fractures are a variant of osteoporosis most commonly associated with total hip arthroplasty (THA), in which the superior aspect of the pelvis can separate from the inferior aspect due to osteolysis or acetabular fracture. The amount and severity of osteoporosis and the potential for biological ingrowth of the implant are some of the factors that may influence the choice of treatment for a particular patient. In cases of severe osteoporosis and loss of pelvic integrity, a custom tri-flange cup may be used. This implant, first introduced in 1992, has several advantages over existing cages. It can provide stability to the pelvic fracture, eliminate the need for construct grafting and intraoperative shaping of the cage, and promote osseointegration of the construct to the surrounding bone.

[0057] Regardless of the context, whether or not a patient's incomplete, deformed, and / or crushed anatomy is an issue, the exemplary system and process for generating patient-specific implants and / or guides utilizes the exemplary 3D bone model reconstruction process and system described above (see FIGS. 1-7 and the exemplary description above) to generate a three-dimensional model of the patient's reconstructed anatomy. More specifically, in the context of total hip arthroplasty associated with a pelvic tear, the exemplary patient-specific system utilizes the patient's pelvis data to generate a 3D model of the patient's complete pelvis for each side of the body (right or left). As a result, a description of the system and process for utilizing the patient's anatomy data and generating a 3D reconstructed model of the patient's anatomy in the case of an incomplete anatomy has been omitted for the sake of brevity. Thus, a description of the process and system for generating patient-specific orthopedic implant guides and associated patient-specific orthopedic implants for patients suffering from incomplete, deformed, and / or crushed anatomy will be described following the formation of the three-dimensional reconstruction model.

[0058] With specific reference to FIGS. 20-22 and 27, after generating the patient-specific reconstructed 3D bone models of the pelvis and femur, both the incomplete patient-specific 3D bone models (of the pelvis and femur) and the reconstructed 3D bone models (of the pelvis and femur) are utilized to generate the patient-specific orthopedic implant and the patient-specific placement guide and / or fasteners for the implant. In particular, the defect shape extraction step includes generating correspondences between the patient-specific 3D model and the reconstructed 3D model (correspondences between the pelvis models and between the femur models, but not between a femur model and a pelvis model). More specifically, the 3D models are compared to identify bones of the reconstructed 3D model that are not present in the patient-specific 3D model. In an exemplary embodiment, missing / abnormal bones are identified by comparing points on the surface of each 3D model and generating a list of discrete points on the surface of the reconstructed 3D model that are not present on the patient-specific 3D model. The system may also record and list (i.e., identify) those surface points that are common between the two models, and may informally note that all other points are common to both models (i.e., both the reconstructed 3D model and the patient-specific 3D model) unless they are recorded as points that are not present on the patient-specific 3D model.

[0059] Referring to FIG. 21, after generating the correspondence between the reconstructed 3D model (generated from the whole bone reconstruction module) and the patient-specific 3D model (generated from the input anatomical data), the missing / abnormal regions from the patient-specific 3D model are located on the reconstructed 3D model. In other words, the reconstructed 3D model is compared with the patient-specific 3D model to identify and record the missing bones from the patient-specific 3D model that are present in the reconstructed 3D model. The location can be performed in various ways, including but not limited to curvature comparison, surface area comparison, and point cloud area comparison. Finally, in an exemplary embodiment, the missing / abnormal bones are located, and the output includes two lists: (a) a first list identifying vertices corresponding to bones of the reconstructed 3D model that are missing or deformed in the patient-specific 3D model, and (b) a second list identifying vertices corresponding to bones of the reconstructed 3D model that are present in the patient-specific 3D model and are normal.

[0060] 21, 22, and 27, the defect shape extraction step is followed by an implant trajectory step. The two vertex lists from the defect shape extraction step and the 3D model of the normal bone (e.g., pelvis, femur, etc.) from the statistical atlas (see Fig. 1, Fig. 2, and the above exemplary description) are input to identify the fixation points of the femoral or pelvic implant. More specifically, the fixation points (i.e., implant trajectories) are automatically selected so that the patient is positioned where he has residual bone. Conversely, the fixation points are not selected in the defective area of ​​the patient's residual bone. In this way, the fixation points are selected independently of the final implant design / shape. The fixation point selection may be performed automatically using the shape information and the statistical atlas position.

[0061] As shown in FIG. 21, after the implant trajectory step, the next step is to generate patient-specific implant parameters. To complete this step, an implant parameterization template is input that defines the implant with a sufficient number of set parameters to define the basic shape of the implant. As an example, in the case of replacing / augmenting a missing or degenerated acetabulum by pelvic reconstruction, the implant parameterization template includes an angle parameter for the orientation of the replacement acetabular cup and a depth parameter corresponding to the dimensions of the femoral head. Other parameters of the acetabular implant include, but are not limited to, the diameter, surface orientation, flange position and shape of the acetabular cup, and the location and orientation of the fixation screws. In the case of a multi-hole implant, the location and structural characteristics of the pores shall be included. As an example, in the case of replacing / augmenting a missing or degenerated femur by femoral reconstruction, the implant parameterization template includes an angle parameter for the orientation of the replacement femoral head, neck length, head offset, proximal angle, and cross-sectional analysis of the lateral femur and intercondylar channel. Those skilled in the art will understand that the parameters selected to define the basic shape of the implant depend on the anatomy to be replaced or supplemented. As a result, a complete description of the parameters sufficient to define the basic shape of the implant is difficult to achieve. Nevertheless, a reconstructed 3D pelvis model may be utilized to obtain the radius of the acetabular cup, the identification of the pelvic bone including the circumferential upper ridge of the acetabular cup, and the identification of the orientation of the acetabular cup with respect to the residual pelvis, as shown, for example, in Fig. 22. Furthermore, the parameters may be refined by considering the implant trajectory so that the implant best / better fits the patient-specific anatomy.

[0062] Following the determination of a number of set parameters sufficient to define the basic shape of the implant, the design of the implant is initiated. More specifically, a first iteration of the overall implant surface model is constructed. This first iteration of the overall implant surface model is defined by a combination of the patient-specific contour and the estimated contour of the implantation area. The estimated contour is determined by the reconstructed 3D bone model, the missing anatomical bone, and features extracted from the reconstructed 3D bone model. These features and the location of the implant site, which can be determined automatically, are used to determine the overall implant shape, as shown in FIG. 22 for example for an acetabular cup implant.

[0063] Referring again to FIG. 20, the first iteration of the overall implant surface model is processed through a custom (i.e., patient-specific) planning sequence. This custom planning sequence may involve input from the surgeon and engineer as part of an iterative review and design process. In particular, the surgeon and / or engineer may review the overall implant surface model and the reconstructed 3D bone model to determine whether changes are required to the overall implant surface model. This review may result in the overall implant surface model being iterated until a consensus is reached between the engineer and the surgeon. The output of this step is the final implant surface model, which may be in the form of a CAD file, CNC machine coding, or rapid manufacturing instructions for creating the final implant or a tangible model.

[0064] 20, 22, and 23, a patient-specific placement guide is designed simultaneously with or subsequent to the design of the patient-specific orthopedic implant. As described above in exemplary form, in the context of an acetabular cup implant, one or more surgical instruments may be designed and manufactured to assist in the placement of the patient-specific acetabular cup. Having designed the patient-specific implant to have a size and shape that matches the remaining bone, the contours and shape of the patient-specific implant may be utilized and included as part of the placement guide.

[0065] In an exemplary embodiment, the acetabular placement guide includes three flanges configured to contact the ilium, ischium, and pubic bone surfaces, the three flanges being interconnected by a ring. Additionally, the flanges of the placement guide may have the same shape, size, and contour of the acetabular cup implant, such that the placement guide has the same predetermined position relative to the acetabular cup implant. In other words, the acetabular placement guide molds as a negative imprint of the patient's anatomy (ilium, ischium, and some surfaces of the pubic bone) as the acetabular cup implant to precisely match the patient's anatomy. However, the implant guide differs significantly from the implant in that it includes one or more fixation holes configured to guide drilling and / or fastener placement. In an exemplary embodiment, the placement guide includes holes sized and oriented to ensure proper orientation of any drill bits or other guides (e.g., dowels) utilized in fixing the acetabular cup implant to the residual pelvis based on image analysis (e.g., micro-CT). The number and orientation of the holes are dependent on the residual bone, which also impacts the shape of the acetabular cup implant. 23 shows an example of a patient-specific placement guide for use in a total hip arthroplasty. In another instance, the guide can be made to fit over the implant and guide only the orientation of the fixation screws. In this configuration, the guide is molded as a negative of the implant so that it can be placed directly over the implant. Even so, the inclusion of at least some of the size, shape, and contour of the patient-specific reconstruction implant is a subject that applies regardless of the bone to which the patient-specific implant will be bonded.

[0066] Utilizing the exemplary systems and methods described herein can provide a wealth of information that can increase the accuracy of orthopedic placement, improve anatomical integration, and enable preoperative measurement of true angle and planar orientation via a reconstructed three-dimensional model.

[0067] Creating customized implants using mass-customizable components An exemplary process and system for producing a customized orthopedic implant using mass-customizable components will be described with reference to Figure 26. For purposes of exemplary description, a total hip arthroplasty for a patient with severe acetabular deficiency will be described, although it will be understood that the exemplary process and system is applicable to any orthopedic implant suitable for mass customization in instances where incomplete anatomy is present.

[0068] Severe acetabular defects require specialized treatment and restorative implant components. One approach is the custom tri-flange, which is a fully custom implant consisting of an acetabular cup and three flanges attached to the ilium, ischium, and pubis. In contrast to this exemplary process and system, prior art tri-flange implants comprise a single complex component that is difficult to manufacture and requires redesign of the entire implant for each case (i.e., fully patient-specific). This exemplary process and system utilizes fully custom components as well as mass-customizable components in a modular manner to generate custom tri-flange implants that allow for custom fitting and porosity.

[0069] A pre-planning step according to the exemplary process is performed to determine the orientation of the three flanges relative to the cup, the flange contact points, and the orientation and size of the acetabular cup. This pre-planning step is performed according to the "Patient-Specific Implants" discussed immediately prior to this section. As an example, the specific implant fixation points are determined by the implant trajectory step using its pre-emptive data inputs, as discussed in the immediately prior section. As previously described, as part of this implant trajectory step, the fixation points of the custom tri-flange are identified by inputting the two vertex lists from the defect geometry extraction step and the 3D model of the normal pelvis from the statistical atlas (see Figures 1, 2, and the exemplary description above). More specifically, the fixation points (i.e., the implant trajectory) are selected to be positioned where the patient has residual bone. In other words, the fixation points are not selected in the defective area of ​​the patient's residual pelvis. In this way, the fixation points are selected independent of the final implant design / shape.

[0070] After the fixation points are determined, the tri-flange component (i.e., flange) is designed using the "patient-specific implant" discussed immediately above in this section. The flange is designed to be oriented with respect to the replacement acetabular cup such that the cup orientation provides acceptable articulation function. Additionally, the flange contact surface is contoured to match the patient's pelvic anatomy in that the tri-flange contact surface is molded as a "negative" of the pelvic bone surface. In the exemplary process of FIG. 23, the final step of the process shown in FIG. 17 is utilized to rapidly prototype the flange (or use conventional computer numerical control (CNC) equipment). After the flange is manufactured, additional machining or steps may be performed to provide cavities into which porous material can be added to the tri-flange.

[0071] The portion of the Tri-Flange system that does not need to be a custom component is the acetabular cup component. In this exemplary process, a family of acetabular cups is first manufactured to provide a basis for building the Tri-Flange system. These "blank" cups are stored and used as needed. If a particular porosity is desired in the cup, mechanical features can be added to the cup to allow for a porous material to be pressed into the cup. Alternatively, if a particular porosity is desired in the cup, the cup can be coated with one or more porous coatings.

[0072] As described above, after forming the blank cup and addressing any porosity issues, the cup is made patient-specific by machining the cup to receive the flanges. In particular, the system software uses a virtual model of the flange to construct virtual locking features for the flange that are machined into the cup by machine coding transformation. These locking features allow the cup to be secured to the flange so that when the flange is attached to the patient's remaining bone, the cup will be properly oriented relative to the remaining pelvis. This machining may use conventional CNC equipment to form the locking features in the blank cup.

[0073] Following fabrication of the locking features as part of the blank cup, the flanges are attached to the cup using the interface between the locking features. The tri-flange assembly (i.e., the final implant) is subjected to an annealing process to promote a strong bond between the components. After annealing of the tri-flange implant, a sterilization process is performed followed by appropriate packaging to ensure a sterile environment for the tri-flange implant.

[0074] Creating Mass-Customized Implants With reference to FIG. 28, an exemplary process and system for generating a mass-customized orthopedic implant guide and associated mass-customized orthopedic implant for patients suffering from incomplete, deformed, and / or comminuted anatomy will be described. For purposes of exemplary description, a total hip arthroplasty for a patient requiring a primary joint replacement will be described. However, it will be understood that the exemplary process and system is applicable to any orthopedic implant and guide suitable for mass customization in cases where an incomplete anatomy exists. For example, the exemplary process and system is applicable to shoulder and knee replacements where bone degeneration (incomplete anatomy), bone deformity, or comminuted fractures exist. As a result, although a hip implant is discussed below, one skilled in the art will understand that the system and process can be applied to other orthopedic implants, guides, instruments, etc., used in primary orthopedic surgery or revision surgery.

[0075] The exemplary process utilizes input data from macroscopic and microscopic perspectives. In particular, the macroscopic perspective involves determining the overall geometry of the orthopedic implant and the corresponding anatomy. Conversely, the microscopic perspective involves considering the shape and structure of the cancellous bone and its porosity.

[0076] The macroscopic view includes a database in communication with a statistical atlas module that records a virtual 3D model of one or more anatomical structures (e.g., bones) to capture the specific anatomical variability in a given population. In an exemplary form, the atlas records a mathematical representation of the anatomical features of one or more anatomical structures expressed as an average representation of a given anatomical population and a variation about the average representation. See FIG. 2 and the above description of the statistical atlas and the method of adding anatomical structures to the statistical atlas of a given population. The output of the statistical atlas goes to an automatic labeling module and a surface / shape analysis module.

[0077] The auto-labeling module utilizes input from the statistical atlas (e.g., regions likely to contain a particular landmark) and local geometric analysis to calculate anatomical landmarks for each anatomy instance in the statistical atlas. This calculation is specific to each landmark. For example, the approximate shape of the region is known, and the location of the landmark being searched for is known relative to the local shape properties. For example, the location of the medial epicondyle point of the distal femur is achieved by refining a search based on the approximate location of the medial epicondyle point in the statistical atlas. Thus, it is known that the medial epicondyle point is the most medial point within this search window, so a search for this most medial point is performed for each bone model within the medial epicondyle region defined in the statistical atlas, and the output of the search is identified as the medial epicondyle point landmark. After the automatic calculation of anatomical landmarks for each virtual 3D model in the statistical atlas population, the virtual 3D models of the statistical atlas, along with the shape / surface analysis output, go to the feature extraction module.

[0078] The shape / surface output is from a shape / surface module that also receives input from the statistical atlas. In the context of the shape / surface module, the virtual 3D models in the statistical atlas population are analyzed for shape / surface features that are not covered by the auto-labeling. In other words, features that correspond to the overall 3D shape of the anatomical structure but do not belong to the features defined in the previous auto-labeling steps are calculated as well. For example, curvature data is calculated for the virtual 3D models.

[0079] The output of the surface / shape analysis and auto-labeling modules goes to a feature extraction module, which uses a combination of landmarks and shape features to calculate mathematical descriptors (i.e., curvature, dimensions) relevant to the implant design for each case in the atlas. These descriptors are used as input for the clustering process.

[0080] The mathematical descriptors are clustered or grouped based on statistical analysis. In particular, the descriptors are statistically analyzed to identify groups (of anatomies) with similar characteristics within the population by comparison with other descriptors from other anatomical populations. It is clear that this clustering presupposes multiple descriptors from multiple anatomies across the population. When new cases not present in the initial clustering are presented to the clustering, the new population is better represented by refinement of the output cluster. The output of this statistical analysis is a finite number of implants (including implant families and sizes) that cover all or a large portion of the anatomical population.

[0081] For each cluster, the parameterization module extracts the mathematical descriptors within that cluster. The mathematical descriptors constitute the parameters (e.g. CAD design parameters) of the final implant model. The extracted mathematical descriptors are fed to the implant surface generation module. This module is responsible for generating a 3D virtual model of the anatomy of each cluster by converting the mathematical descriptors into surface descriptors. The 3D virtual model complements the microscopic view prior to load testing and implant manufacturing.

[0082] At a microscopic level, data is obtained that indicates the structural integrity of each biological structure in a given population. In an exemplary embodiment, this bone data may include micro-CT data that provides structural information about the cancellous bone. More specifically, the micro-CT data may include images of the bone in question (multiple micro-CT images of multiple bones across the population). These images are then segmented by a trabecular structure extraction module to extract the three-dimensional shape of the cancellous bone and create a virtual 3D model of each bone in the population. The resulting 3D virtual model is input into a pore size and shape module. As shown graphically in FIG. 84, the 3D virtual model includes pore size and shape information that is evaluated in the pore size and shape module to determine the pore size and size of the cancellous bone. This evaluation is useful for analyzing the pore size and shape of the bone in the intramedullary canal, and may facilitate integration between the femoral residual bone and the femoral implant by coating the stem of the femoral implant or treating it to show a porous exterior. The output of this module goes to the Virtual Load Testing module in combination with the 3D virtual model output from the Implant Surface Generation module.

[0083] The load testing module combines the implant porosity data from the pore size and shape module and the implant shape data from the implant surface generation module to define the final implant shape model and properties. For example, the shape and properties include providing a porous coating of the final implant model that generally matches the cancellous porosity of the bone in question. The final implant model incorporating the shape and properties is subjected to virtual load testing (finite element and mechanical analysis) to verify the functional quality of the model. To the extent that the functional quality is not acceptable, the parameters defining the implant shape and porosity are modified until acceptable performance is achieved. Assuming that the final implant model meets the load testing criteria, the final implant model is utilized to generate the machine instructions necessary to convert the virtual model into a physical implant (and can be further improved by manufacturing processes known to those skilled in the art). In an exemplary form, the machine instructions may include rapid manufacturing machine instructions to manufacture the final implant by a rapid prototyping process (that properly captures the porosity structure) or a combination of traditional manufacturing and rapid prototyping.

[0084] Creating gender / ethnicity specific hip implants 29-84, an exemplary process and system for generating gender-specific and / or ethnic-specific implants will be described. For purposes of illustrative description, a total hip arthroplasty for a patient requiring a primary joint replacement will be described. However, it will be understood that the exemplary process and system is applicable to any orthopedic implant suitable for customization. For example, the exemplary process and system is applicable to shoulder and knee replacements as well as other primary joint replacements. As a result, although a hip implant is discussed below, one skilled in the art will understand that the system and process is applicable to other orthopedic implants, guides, instruments, etc., used in primary orthopedic surgical procedures or revision procedures.

[0085] The hip joint is composed of the head of the femur and the acetabulum of the pelvis. The hip joint is one of the most stable joints in the body due to its anatomy. This stability is provided by a rigid ball and socket configuration. The femoral head is approximately spherical at the joint forming 2 / 3 of a sphere. Data show that the diameter of the femoral head is smaller in women than in men. In a normal hip joint, the center of the femoral head is assumed to be exactly coincident with the center of the acetabulum, and this assumption is used as the basis for the design of most hip joint systems. However, the natural acetabulum is not deep enough to cover the entire natural femoral head. The nearly circular portion of the femoral head is slightly flattened at the top, making it spheroidal rather than spherical. This spheroidal shape distributes the load in a ring-like pattern around the upper pole.

[0086] The geometric center of the femoral head is crossed by the three axes of the joint: the horizontal, vertical, and anterior-posterior axes. The femoral head is supported by the neck of the femur, which connects to the shaft. The axis of the femoral neck is set obliquely and extends upward, medial, and anteriorly. The angle of inclination of the femoral neck relative to the shaft in the frontal plane is the neck-shaft angle. In most adults, this angle varies from 90 to 135° and is important because it determines the effectiveness of the hip abductors, limb length, and the forces exerted at the hip joint.

[0087] An inclination angle greater than 125° is called coxa valga, whereas an inclination angle less than 125° is called coxa vara. An inclination angle greater than 125° is associated with increased limb length, decreased effectiveness of the hip abductors, increased load on the femoral head, and increased stress on the femoral neck. In the case of coxa vara, an inclination angle less than 125° is associated with decreased limb length, increased effectiveness of the hip abductors, decreased load on the femoral head, and decreased stress on the femoral neck. The femoral neck forms an acute angle with the axis of the femoral condyles. This angle is called the anteversion angle because it points medially and anteriorly. In adults, this angle averages about 7.5°.

[0088] The acetabulum is located on the lateral aspect of the hip joint where the ilium, ischium, and pubis meet. These three separate bones join to form the acetabulum, with the ilium and ischium each contributing approximately 2 / 5 of the acetabulum and the pubis contributing 1 / 5. The acetabulum is not deep enough to cover the entire femoral head, and has both an articular and a non-articular portion. However, the acetabular labrum deepens the fossa and provides additional stability. The acetabulum, along with the acetabular labrum, covers slightly more than 50% of the femoral head. Also, only the lateral sides of the acetabulum are lined with articular cartilage, and a deep acetabular notch cuts into it inferiorly. The center of the acetabular cavity is deeper than the articular cartilage and is the non-articular portion. This center is called the acetabular fossa and is separated from the pelvic bone interface by a thin plate. The acetabular fossa is a unique area for each patient and is used to create a patient-specific guide for drilling and positioning the acetabular cup components. Additionally, variations in anatomical characteristics further necessitate population-specific implant design.

[0089] Some of the problems associated with the use of prior art cementless components can be attributed to the variety of femoral canal sizes, shapes, and orientations. One of the challenges in femoral stem orthopedic implant design is the large variation in medial-lateral and anterior-posterior dimensions. There is also a large variation in the ratio of proximal to distal canal size. The different combinations of various arcs, tapers, curves, and offsets in the normal population are vast. However, this is not the only problem.

[0090] Systematic differences in femoral morphology and the lack of clear standards for modern populations make the design of appropriate hip implant systems problematic. For example, significant differences in lordosis, torsion, and cross-sectional shape exist between Native Americans, African Americans, and Caucasians. Femoral differences between Asian and Western populations are seen in the femoral lordosis, with Chinese femorals being more anteriorly curved and externally rotated, with smaller intramedullary canals and distal femoral condyles compared to Caucasians. Similarly, Caucasian femorals are larger than Japanese femorals in terms of the length dimension of the distal femoral condyles. Ethnic differences also exist in proximal femoral bone mineral density (BMD) and hip shaft length between African Americans and Caucasians. The combined effects of higher BMD, shorter hip shaft length, and shorter intertrochanteric width may explain the lower incidence of osteoporotic fractures in African American women compared to Caucasian women. Similarly, older Asian and black American men have been found to have thicker cortical bones and higher BMD than white and Hispanic men, which may contribute to the increased bone strength in these ethnic groups.In general, black American men have thicker cortical bones, narrower endosteal diameters, and higher BMD than white American men.

[0091] Combined with systematic (ethnic) differences in the femur and pelvis, the primary hip system becomes even more challenging and revision surgery becomes more complex. In addition to these normal anatomical and ethnic variations, the challenges faced by the revision surgeon include (a) distortion of the femoral canal due to osteoporosis around the originally placed prosthesis and (b) iatrogenic defects due to removal of components and cement.

[0092] All the above factors have led many hip surgeons to look for ways to improve the design of uncemented femoral prostheses. In a total hip replacement (primary or revision), the ideal is to establish an optimal fit between the femoral ball and the acetabular cup. The neck of the femoral stem should have a cruciform cross section to reduce stiffness. The length of the stem should be such that the stem is in parallel contact with the femoral wall over 2-3 canal diameters. The proximal third of the stem is porous or hydroxyapatite (HA) coated. The stem should also be cylindrical (i.e., not tapered) to accommodate bending loads as well as allow proximal transfer of all rotational and axial loads. The position of the femoral head should reproduce the patient's own head center if not abnormal.

[0093] One attempt to meet these goals is to manufacture femoral prostheses individually for each patient -- in other words, create a prosthesis that is unique to that particular patient, rather than attempting to reshape the patient's bone to fit an off-the-shelf prosthesis.

[0094] There are several common design criteria for patient-specific (or mass-customized) primary and revision hip replacements. Among these design criteria are: (1) a hip stem without a collar (except in revision cases) to allow uniform load distribution to the femur; (2) a hip stem with a modified rhomboid cross section to maximize fit / fill while maintaining rotational stability; (3) a hip stem that is curved as needed to conform to the patient's bone; (4) the hip stem is inserted along a curved path with no gap between the prosthesis and the bone; (5) a hip stem neck with a cruciate cross section to reduce stiffness; (6) a stem length that provides parallel contact with the femoral wall over two to three canal diameters; (7) a proximal third of the hip stem that is porous or hydroxyapatite (HA) coated; (8) a hip stem that is cylindrical (i.e., not tapered) to accommodate bending loads and allow proximal transfer of all rotational and axial loads; and (9) a hip stem with a femoral head position that replicates the patient's own head center when not abnormal.

[0095] The following is an exemplary process and system for producing mass-customized orthopedic implants for patients requiring primary joint replacement that takes into account the gender and / or ethnicity of the patient population. For purposes of exemplary description, a total hip arthroplasty for patients with incomplete anatomy is described. However, it is understood that the exemplary process and system is applicable to any orthopedic implant suitable for mass customization in cases where incomplete anatomy exists. For example, the exemplary process and system is applicable to shoulder and knee replacements where bone degeneration (incomplete anatomy), bone deformity, or comminuted fractures exist. As a result, although the femoral component of a hip implant is discussed below, one skilled in the art will understand that the system and process can be applied to other orthopedic implants, guides, instruments, etc., used in primary orthopedic surgery or revision surgery.

[0096] FIG. 29 illustrates an overall process flow for generating both mass-customized and patient-specific hip implants using a statistical atlas. First, the process includes a statistical atlas including multiple instances of one or more bones being analyzed. In the exemplary context of a hip implant, the statistical atlas includes multiple instances of bone models for the pelvic bone and femur. An articular surface topography analysis is performed for at least the acetabular component (i.e., the acetabulum) and the proximal femoral component (i.e., the femoral head). In particular, the articular surface topography analysis involves the calculation of landmarks, measurements, and topography features for each bone of a given population of the statistical atlas. The articular surface topography analysis also includes the generation of quantitative values, such as statistics, representative of the calculation results. From these calculation results, a distribution of the calculation results is plotted and an analysis is performed based on the distribution. For example, in the case of a bell-shaped distribution, it can be seen that approximately 90% of the population is grouped together, and by designing a non-patient-specific implant (e.g., a mass-customized implant) to fit appropriately into this grouping, the cost to the patient is reduced compared to a patient-specific implant. For the other 10% of the population, patient-specific implants may be a better approach.

[0097] In the context of mass-customized implants, statistical atlases may be used to quantitatively assess the number of different groups (i.e., different implants) that can cover the vast majority of a given population. These quantitative assessments may result in data clusters that indicate general parameters of base implant designs that are not patient-specific, but are more specific than commercially available alternatives.

[0098] In the context of patient-specific implants, a statistical atlas may be used to quantitatively assess what normal bone represents and the differences between the patient's bone and normal bone. More specifically, the statistical atlas may include curvature data associated with an average or template bone model. This template bone model can then be used to extrapolate what the patient's correct bone should be and to create the implants and surgical instruments used to perform the implant surgery.

[0099] Figure 30 is a pictorial summary of the use of statistical atlases in the design of mass-customized and patient-specific hip implants. In the context of the Implant box, reference is again made to Figures 20 and 21 and the associated description of these figures. Similarly, in the context of the Planner box, reference is again made to Figure 20 and the associated description of the Custom Planning Interface. Finally, in the context of the Patient-Specific Guide box, reference is again made to Figure 22 and the associated description of this figure.

[0100] FIG. 31 shows a flow chart of an exemplary process that can be utilized to design and manufacture gender and / or ethnicity specific hip implants. In particular, the process includes utilizing a statistical atlas that includes various samples of proximal femora (i.e., femur including femoral head) with associated data identifying the gender and ethnicity of the individual to whom the bone belongs. Additionally, the statistical atlas module records virtual 3D models of one or more anatomical structures (e.g., bones) to capture the unique anatomical variations in a given gender and / or ethnic population. In an exemplary form, the atlas records mathematical depictions of anatomical features of one or more anatomical structures expressed as average depictions and variations about the average depictions of a given anatomical population that may have a common gender and / or ethnicity (or can be grouped to have one of multiple ethnicities with anatomical commonalities). See FIG. 2 and the above description of the statistical atlas and the method of adding anatomical structures to the statistical atlas of a given population. The output of the statistical atlas goes to an auto-labeling module and a surface / shape analysis module.

[0101] 31-43, the auto-labeling module utilizes input from the statistical atlas (e.g., regions likely to contain particular landmarks) and local geometric analysis to calculate anatomical landmarks for each anatomical instance in the statistical atlas. As an example, for each 3D virtual model of a femur, various landmarks of the proximal femur are calculated. The landmarks include, but are not limited to, (1) the femoral head center, which is the center point of the femoral head approximated by a sphere; (2) the greater trochanter point, which is the point on the greater trochanter that is the shortest distance to a plane passing through the neck diaphysis point perpendicular to the anatomical neck centerline; (3) the osteotomy point, which is a point 15 mm from the end of the lesser trochanter (approximately 30 mm from the lesser trochanter point); (4) the neck diaphysis point, which is a point on the femoral head sphere whose tangent plane encloses the smallest femoral neck cross-sectional area; (5) the femoral neck fulcrum, which is the cross-section with the smallest diameter along the femoral shaft; (6) the intramedullary canal diaphysis, which is the cross-section with the smallest diameter along the intramedullary canal; (7) the femoral neck fulcrum, which is a point on the femoral anatomical axis that forms an angle equal to the femoral neck angle with the femoral head center and the distal end of the femoral anatomical axis; and (8) the lesser trochanter point, which is the point on the lesser trochanter area that protrudes most outward. As another example, the identified anatomical landmarks are used to calculate various axes of the proximal femur for each 3D virtual model of the femur, including, but not limited to, (a) a femoral neck anatomical axis that is coaxial with a line connecting the femoral head center to the femoral neck center, (b) a femoral neck axis that is coaxial with a line connecting the femoral head center point to the femoral neck fulcrum, and (c) a femoral anatomical axis that is coaxial with a line connecting two points located at 23% and 40% of the total length of the femur starting from the proximal end of the femur. As yet another example, the identified anatomical landmarks and axes are used to calculate various measurements of the proximal femur for each 3D virtual model of the femur.The measurements included: (i) proximal angle, which is the 3D angle between the femoral anatomical axis and the femoral neck anatomical axis; (ii) head offset, which is the horizontal distance between the femoral anatomical axis and the femoral head center; (iii) head height, which is the vertical distance between the lesser trochanter point (mentioned above) and the femoral head center; (iv) greater trochanter-head center distance, which is the distance between the femoral head center and the greater trochanter point (mentioned above); (v) neck length, which is the distance between the femoral head center and the neck fulcrum (mentioned above); and (vi) femoral (vii) femoral neck diameter, which is the diameter of a circle fitted to the neck cross section in a plane perpendicular to the femoral neck anatomical axis and passing through the neck midpoint (mentioned above); (viii) femoral neck transepicondylar anteversion angle, which is the angle between the transepicondylar axis and the femoral neck axis; (ix) femoral neck posterior condylar anteversion angle, which is the angle between the posterior condylar axis and the femoral neck axis; (x) LPFA, which is the angle between the functional axis and the vector pointing to the greater trochanter; and (xi). (xii) the calcar index area, defined as (ZX) / Z, where Z is the femur area 10 cm below the midpoint of the lesser trochanter and X is the intramedullary canal area 10 cm below the midpoint of the lesser trochanter; (xiii) the intramedullary canal area 3 cm below the midpoint of the lesser trochanter and the intramedullary canal area 10 cm below the midpoint of the lesser trochanter; (xiv) the calcar area ratio, which is the ratio of the intramedullary canal area 3 cm below the midpoint of the lesser trochanter to the intramedullary canal area 10 cm below the midpoint of the lesser trochanter; (xv) the intramedullary canal area 3 cm below the midpoint of the lesser trochanter and the intramedullary canal area 10 cm below the midpoint of the lesser trochanter. (xiv) minor axis / major axis ratio, which is the ratio between the minor and major axes of the fitting ellipsoid and the intramedullary canal cross section at the narrowest point on the intramedullary canal; and (xv) femoral radius / intramedullary canal radius ratio, which is the ratio of the radius of a circle using a best-fit circle around the intramedullary canal in a plane perpendicular to the femoral circumference and the femoral anatomical axis (this ratio reflects the cortical bone thickness and therefore the cortical bone loss in the case of osteoporosis).

[0102] 31 and 45-47, the output of the auto-labeling module is used to evaluate femoral stem parameters for a given population, specifically the medial contour, neck angle, and head offset, whether the population is grouped based on ethnicity, gender, or a combination of the two.

[0103] For the medial contour, the intramedullary canal of each femur in the population is generated by intersecting the intramedullary canal with a plane having a perpendicular axis (vector cross product) that runs through the femoral fulcrum and is perpendicular to both the femoral anatomical axis and the neck axis. After the contours are generated for each femur in the population, the population is subdivided into groups according to the size of the intramedullary canal. During the subdivision, the contours may be out of plane, so an alignment process is performed to align all the contours with respect to a common plane (e.g., the XZ plane). The alignment process includes aligning the axis perpendicular to both the femoral neck axis and the anatomical axis with the Y axis, and then aligning the anatomical axis with the Z axis. In this way, all the contours are moved with respect to a specific point so that the contours have a common coordinate system.

[0104] Once the contours have a common coordinate system, the femoral neck points are used to ensure that the contour points are in-plane. In particular, the femoral neck points are matching points that reflect the actual anatomy and ensure that the points on the contour are in-plane. Ensuring that the contour points are in-plane greatly reduces alignment variability between femurs in a population, facilitating the use of the contours in the design of head offset and implant angle.

[0105] With reference to FIG. 48, the statistical atlas is also useful for interpolating between normal and osteoporotic bones. In designing and sizing femoral stems, one of the important considerations is the intramedullary canal dimension. In the case of normal bone, the femur has a significantly narrowed intramedullary canal compared to femora exhibiting osteoporosis. This narrowed intramedullary canal dimension is at least in part the result of a reduction in bone thickness (measured perpendicular to the femur's major axis) with a corresponding recession of the femoral internal surface that outlines the intramedullary canal. In this method, a synthetic population is created by interpolating thicknesses between healthy and severely osteoporotic bones and generating a virtual 3D model having said thicknesses. This data set thus includes bones corresponding to different stages of osteoporosis. Hereinafter, this data set can be used as input for implant stem design.

[0106] In an exemplary embodiment, the statistical atlas includes populations of normal, non-osteoporotic and osteoporotic bones, where the bones are femurs. Each of these normal femurs in the atlas is quantified and displayed as a 3D virtual model according to the process described herein for adding bones to the statistical atlas. Similarly, each of the osteoporotic femurs in the atlas is quantified and displayed as a 3D virtual model according to the process described herein for adding bones to the statistical atlas. As part of the 3D models of normal and osteoporotic bones, the intramedullary canal dimensions are recorded along the longitudinal length of the femur. Using the atlas point correspondence, the intramedullary canal is identified on the atlas bone as spanning a percentage of the total bone length adjacent to the lesser trochanter (approximately 5%) and a second percentage of the total bone length adjacent to the cortical distal point (approximately 2%). Additionally, points on the external surface of the bone that fall within these proximal and distal boundaries are used to determine the thickness of the bone, defined as the distance from the external point to the closest point on the IM canal.

[0107] In the context of the proximal femur, Figures 51-62 confirm that gender differences exist across any ethnic population. As shown in Figures 59 and 60, the statistical atlas template 3D model of the female proximal femur shows statistically significant measurements when compared to the template 3D model of the male proximal femur. In particular, the femoral head offset is about 9.3% less in women than in men. In current implants, the femoral head offset increases with stem size, which is acceptable for normal women. However, problems arise when capturing the femoral head offset in osteoporosis and osteopenia, where osteoporosis increases the intramedullary canal size (meaning larger stem size and increased offset). Similarly, the neck diameter and femoral head radius are about 11.2% smaller in women than in men. Also, the neck length is about 9.5% shorter in women than in men. Also, the proximal angle is about 0.2% smaller in women than in men. Finally, the femoral head height is about 13.3% lower in women than in men. As a result, the gender-specific bone data confirm that simple scaling of generic femoral implants (i.e., gender-neutral) does not capture differences in bone shape and therefore gender-specific femoral implants are necessary.

[0108] 63-68, not only are the dimensions of the proximal femur different, but also the cross-sectional shape of the femur along the length of the intramedullary canal. In particular, across a given population in a statistical atlas of male and female femurs, the intramedullary canal cross-section in males is closer to a circle than in females. More specifically, the intramedullary canal cross-section is 8.98% more eccentric in females than in males. As discussed in more detail below, this gender-specific data includes portions of the feature extraction data that are plotted to arrive at clusters from which quantity and overall shape parameters are extracted to arrive at gender-specific femoral implants.

[0109] As shown in Figures 72-74, the statistical atlas includes calculations corresponding to measurements across a given femur population (separated by gender) for head center offset in the anterior-posterior (AP) direction. In the exemplary embodiment, the AP direction was determined by a vector pointing forward perpendicular to both the functional axis and the posterior condylar axis. The offset was measured between the femoral head center and two reference points, the first being the midpoint of the anatomical axis and the second being the femoral neck fulcrum. In summary, the AP head height relative to the neck fulcrum and the midpoint of the anatomical axis did not show significant differences between femora of either sex. Again, this gender-specific data includes portions of the feature extraction data plotted to arrive at clusters from which parameters of quantity and overall shape were extracted to arrive at gender-specific femoral implants.

[0110] 28 and 31, the head center offset, intramedullary canal cross-sectional shape data, and femoral medial contour data within the statistical atlas population include a portion of the extracted feature data plotted to identify the number of clusters present across a given population (one gender specific and a second ethnicity specific, assuming the statistical atlas includes data regarding the ethnicity associated with each bone) for the design of a gender- and / or ethnicity-specific mass-customized implant consistent with the flowchart and associated description of FIG 28. The gender- and / or ethnicity-specific identified clusters are utilized to extract parameters necessary for the design of a mass-customized femoral implant.

[0111] FIG. 76 illustrates an exemplary mass-customized femoral component according to the present disclosure. In particular, the mass-customized femoral component includes four major elements, including a ball, a neck, a proximal stem, and a distal stem. Each of these major elements includes an interchangeable interface that allows the ball, neck, and stem to be interchanged with other interchangeable elements. In this way, if a larger femoral ball is required, only the femoral ball is replaced. Similarly, if a larger neck offset is desired, a different neck element is replaced that provides the required offset, while the other three elements are maintained as needed. In this way, the femoral component can be customized to fit the patient within certain limits, without necessarily sacrificing the fitting and kinematics that would be sacrificed if a one-size-fits-all implant were used. Thus, all of the femoral elements can be replaced with other mass-customized elements to better suit the patient's anatomy.

[0112] In this exemplary embodiment, the neck is configured to rotate about the axis of the proximal stem so that its rotational orientation relative to the proximal stem can be adjusted intraoperatively. In particular, preoperative measurements may establish a planned rotational position of the neck relative to the proximal stem. Even then, intraoperative considerations such as in vivo kinematic testing may lead the surgeon to change the preoperative rotational orientation to improve kinematics or avoid certain impingements. In one example, the neck comprises a cylindrical stud with an inset circumferential groove having a concave-convex surface. The cylindrical stud is received within an axial cylindrical channel in the proximal stem. In addition to the cylindrical channel, a second channel intersects the cylindrical channel and is also concave-convex and shaped to receive a plate with a semicircular groove configured to engage the concave-convex surface of the inset circumferential groove. A pair of screws fixed to the proximal stem push the plate into engagement with the cylindrical stud, ultimately disabling any rotational movement of the cylindrical stud relative to the proximal stem. Thus, once this locking engagement is reached, the screw may be loosened to permit rotational movement between the cylindrical stud and the proximal stem as may be necessary for intraoperative rotational adjustment.

[0113] While the engagement between the neck and the ball is considered conventional, the engagement between the proximal and distal stems is novel. In particular, the proximal stem includes distal legs that are threadedly received in a threaded opening extending into the distal stem by threading and engagement. The proximal stem is then attached to the distal stem by rotating it relative to the distal stem so that the threads of the legs engage the threads of the opening in the distal stem. Rotation of the proximal stem relative to the distal stem is complete when the proximal stem abuts the distal stem. However, if rotational adjustment is required between the proximal and distal stems, a washer may be utilized to provide a spacer that corresponds to the correct rotational adjustment. As another example, if a larger rotational adjustment is required, the thickness of the washer is increased. On the other hand, a thinner washer will correspondingly provide less rotational adjustment.

[0114] Each of the primary elements may be adapted to be manufactured as a predetermined alternative to capture the size and contour variations of a given gender and / or ethnicity. In this manner, the primary element alternatives may be fused or fitted to mimic a patient-specific implant that is closer to the patient's anatomy than traditional mass-customized femoral components at a fraction of the cost and process used to produce a patient-specific femoral implant.

[0115] 77 illustrates yet another exemplary mass-customized femoral component according to the present disclosure. In particular, the mass-customized femoral component includes five major elements, including a ball, a neck, a proximal stem, a middle stem, and a distal stem. Each of these major elements includes an interchangeable interface that allows the ball, neck, and stem to be interchanged with other interchangeable elements. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that by replicating the patient's natural femur with an increased number of elements of the mass-customized femoral component that are similar to stacked slices of the patient's natural femur, the fitting of a patient-specific implant with the mass-customized elements can be more closely matched.

[0116] Similar to the anatomical differences between sexes and ethnicities in the proximal femur, Figures 78-83 confirm that sex and ethnicity differences exist across the general pelvis population in the statistical atlas. Referring again to Figure 28, a series of mass-customized acetabular cup implants are designed and manufactured using statistical atlas data (i.e., pelvis populations) grouped based on sex and / or ethnicity. The grouped atlas data is subjected to an automated labeling process and a surface / shape analysis process to segment the acetabular cup shapes within the populations, as graphically shown in Figure 78. Features are also extracted through a process of labeling (of the location of the acetabular ligament) and contour analysis (to evaluate the contour of the acetabular cup), as graphically shown in Figures 82 and 83, which ultimately produces an anatomical cup implant surface, as shown in Figure 79. From this analysis, it can be seen that the acetabular cup and femoral head are not composed of a single radius of curvature, but rather multiple radii, as shown in Figures 80 and 81.

[0117] Creating animal-specific implants Referring to FIG. 85, an exemplary system and method for designing and manufacturing animal-specific (i.e., animal patient-specific) implants and associated instrumentation is similar to the process shown and described above with respect to FIG. 20, which is incorporated herein by reference. By way of preamble, an image of the animal's anatomy is acquired and automatically segmented to generate a virtual 3D bone model. Although graphically depicted as a CT scan image, it is understood that other imaging modalities besides CT, such as, but not limited to, MRI, ultrasound, and X-ray, may be utilized. The virtual 3D bone model of the diseased anatomy is then loaded into a statistical atlas in accordance with the exemplary disclosure above. Input from the statistical atlas is then utilized to reconstruct the bone and create the reconstructed virtual 3D bone model. Also, bony landmarks are calculated on the surface of the reconstructed virtual 3D bone model to allow for the determination of correct implant size. The shape of the diseased bone is then mapped and converted into a parametric form and then used to create an animal-specific implant that mimics the remaining anatomy. The animal-specific implants as well as animal-specific instrumentation are manufactured and utilized to create the remaining bone of the animal and place the animal-specific implants.

[0118] Referring to FIG. 86, an exemplary system and method for designing and manufacturing mass-customized animal implants is similar to the process shown and described above with respect to FIG. 28, which is incorporated herein by reference. As a prelude, auto-labeling and surface / shape analysis are applied to 3D animal bone models from a statistical atlas for the bones in question. The auto-labeling process utilizes information stored in the atlas (e.g., regions likely to contain specific landmarks) and local geometric analysis to automatically calculate anatomical landmarks for each 3D animal bone model. For each animal bone in question in the statistical atlas, shape / surface analysis directly extracts features of the surface shape of the 3D virtual animal bone model. Each 3D animal bone model is then subjected to a feature extraction process that uses a combination of landmarks and shape features to calculate features relevant to implant design. These features are used as input for a clustering process, and a predefined clustering method is used to divide the animal bone population into groups with similar features. Each resulting cluster represents a case that is used to define the shape and size of a single animal implant. For each cluster center (implant size), a subsequent parameterization process extracts global implant model parameters (e.g., computer-aided design (CAD) parameters). The extracted parameters are then used to generate global implant surfaces and sizes for each cluster. Also, depending on the cluster that the animal patient is in, a mass-customized implant is selected from the required group and implanted.

[0119] Creating a patient-specific cutting guide 87-102, an exemplary process and system for integrating multi-dimensional medical imaging, computer-aided design (CAD), and computer graphics capabilities to design a patient-specific cutting guide is described. For purposes of exemplary illustration only, the patient-specific cutting guide is described in the context of total hip arthroplasty. Nevertheless, one skilled in the art will recognize that the exemplary process and system may be applied to any surgical procedure in which a cutting guide may be utilized.

[0120] As shown in FIG. 87, an overview of an exemplary system flow begins with receiving input data representative of an anatomy. The input anatomical data includes two-dimensional (2D) images or three-dimensional (3D) surface representations of the anatomy of interest, and may be in the form of a surface model or point cloud, for example. In situations where 2D images are used, these 2D images are utilized to construct a 3D surface representation of the anatomy of interest. Those skilled in the art are familiar with utilizing 2D images of anatomy to construct a 3D surface representation. Thus, a detailed description of this process is omitted for the sake of brevity. By way of example, the input anatomical data may include one or more of X-rays (taken from at least two perspectives), computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), or any other imaging data capable of generating a 3D surface representation. In an exemplary embodiment, the anatomy includes a pelvis and a femur.

[0121] However, it is understood that the following is an exemplary description of anatomical structures that may be used with the exemplary system and is not intended to limit the use of the system with other anatomical structures in any way. As used herein, tissue includes bone, muscle, ligament, tendon, and any other finite type of structural material with a specific function in a multicellular organism. As a result, when discussing the exemplary systems and methods in the context of bones related to the hip joint, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize the applicability of the systems and methods to other tissues.

[0122] The input anatomical data of the femur and pelvis in the system goes to one of two modules depending on the type of input data. In the case of X-ray data, 2D X-ray images are input to the Non-rigid module to extract the 3D bone contours. If the input data is in the form of CT scans or MRI images, these scans / images go to the Auto-Segmentation module for automatic segmentation. The 3D bone contour (and 3D cartilage contour) is extracted.

[0123] With reference to FIG. 88, the non-rigid module uses multiple x-ray images acquired from at least two different viewpoints to apply one or more pre-processing steps. These steps may include one or more of noise reduction and image processing. A calibration step is applied to the resulting pre-processed x-ray images to align the x-ray images. The x-ray images are preferably acquired in the presence of a fixed position calibration device and aligned to this fixed position calibration device. However, in the absence of a fixed position calibration device, the x-ray images may be calibrated using common detected features across the images. The output of this calibration process is the position of the anatomy relative to the imaging device, identified in FIG. 88 by the reference symbol "position".

[0124] The resulting pre-processed X-ray image is subjected to a feature extraction step, which includes one or more image feature operations utilizing the pre-processed X-ray image. By way of example, these operations may include grayscale features, contours, texture components, or any other image-derived features. In this exemplary process, the feature extraction step outputs the contours of the anatomical structures (e.g., bone shapes) referenced as "contours" in FIG. 88 as well as image features referenced as "texture" as derived from the X-ray image. Both the contours of the anatomical structures and the image feature data are fed to the non-rigid registration step.

[0125] In the non-rigid registration step, the output of the feature extraction and calibration steps is registered to a 3D template model of the anatomical structure in question from a statistical atlas. As an example, the 3D template model is generated in response to non-linear principal components from an anatomical database that includes part of the statistical atlas. In the non-rigid registration step, the 3D template model fits the shape parameters of the X-ray image with the position, contour, and texture data by optimizing its shape parameters (non-linear principal components). The output of the non-rigid registration step is a patient-specific 3D bone model, similar to the patient-specific 3D bone model output from the automatic segmentation module for CT scan or MRI images, which goes to the virtual templating module.

[0126] With reference to FIG. 91, the automatic segmentation process is initialized, for example, by acquiring a CT scan or MRI image and running an automatic segmentation sequence. With specific reference to FIG. 90, the automatic segmentation sequence includes aligning the scan / image to a reference or 3D model of the anatomical structure of interest. After the scan / image is aligned to the reference 3D model, it is processed through an initial deformation process to calculate normal vectors, locate profile points, linearly interpolate intensity values, filter the resulting profile using a Savitsky-Golay filter, generate gradients of the profile, weight the profile using a Gaussian weight profile formula, determine maximum profiles, and deform the reference 3D model using these maximum profiles. The resulting deformed 3D model is projected onto a template 3D model from a statistical atlas for the anatomical structure of interest. The parameters of the template 3D model are used to further deform the deformed 3D model in a secondary deformation process to account for unique features in the template 3D model. After this latter deformation process, the deformed 3D model is compared to the scan / image to identify whether significant differences exist.

[0127] In situations where significant differences exist between the deformed 3D model and the scan / image, the deformed 3D model and scan / image are subjected to the initial deformation process again, followed by a secondary deformation process, and this looped process continues until the deformed 3D model is within a predefined tolerance for the differences between the deformed 3D model and the scan / image.

[0128] After determining that the deformed 3D model does not show significant differences with respect to previous iterations or after achieving the maximum number of iterations, the surface edges of the deformed 3D model are smoothed and then the surface is further smoothed by a high resolution remeshing step to create a smooth 3D model, to which an initial deformation sequence (same as the initial deformation process described above prior to surface smoothing) is applied to generate a 3D segmented bone model.

[0129] Referring again to Figure 91, the 3D segmented bone model is processed to generate contours. In particular, the intersections of the 3D segmented bone model with the scans / images are calculated, which become the binary contours in each image / scan plane.

[0130] The 3D segmented bone model is also processed to generate a patient-specific statistical 3D model of bone appearance, specifically modeling the appearance of the bone and any anatomical abnormalities based on image information present within and outside the contours.

[0131] The bone contours are then reviewed by a user of the segmentation system. This user may be a segmentation expert or a casual user of the segmentation system who notices one or more regions of the 3D model that do not correlate with the segmentation regions. This lack of correlation may be in the context of missing or obviously inaccurate regions. Upon identification of one or more erroneous regions, the user may select a "seed point" on the model that represents the center of the region where the erroneous region is located. Alternatively, the missing region is manually outlined. The system software uses the seed point to add or subtract contours near the seed point by using an initial scan / image of the anatomy from CT or MRI. For example, the user may select an area where a bone spur should be present, and the software compares the scan / image with the area on the 3D model and adds the bone spur to the segmentation sequence. Any changes to the 3D model are ultimately reviewed by the user for confirmation or cancellation. This review and revision sequence may be repeated as many times as necessary to capture anatomical differences between the scan / image and the 3D model. Once the user is satisfied with the 3D model, the resulting model may be manually manipulated to remove bridges and repair areas of the model as necessary prior to output to the virtual templating module.

[0132] As shown in Figures 87 and 92, the virtual templating module receives a patient-specific 3D model from one or both of the automatic segmentation and non-rigid registration modules. In the context of the hip joint, the patient-specific 3D model includes the pelvis and femur, both of which are inputs for the auto-labeling process. This auto-labeling step calculates anatomical landmarks for implant placement on the 3D models of the femur and pelvis by region and local shape search from similar anatomical structures present in a statistical atlas.

[0133] In the context of automatic placement of a femoral stem with distal fixation, as shown in FIG. 93, automatic labeling includes the definition of axes on the femur and the implant. For the femur, the anatomical femoral axis (AFA) is calculated, followed by the proximal anatomical axis (PAA). The proximal neck angle (PNA) is then calculated, which is defined as the angle between the AFA and the PNA. For the femoral implant, the implant axis is along the length of the implant stem, and the implant neck axis is along the length of the implant neck. Similar to the femoral PNA, the implant angle is defined as the angle between the implant axis and the implant neck axis. The implant with the implant angle closest to the PNA is then selected. The implant fitting angle (IFA) is then defined as the intersection of the anatomical proximal axis with the vector drawn from the femoral head center at the selected implant angle.

[0134] As shown in Figure 93, the femoral spine is aligned with the distal fixation and the calculated anatomical landmarks. If automatic placement of the femoral component is used, an implant size assignment step determines / estimates the appropriate implant size for the femoral component. The implant size is selected by comparing the implant width to the intramedullary canal width and selecting the implant with the width closest to the intramedullary canal. The system then proceeds to the implant placement step.

[0135] In the implant placement step of the distal fixed femoral stem, the initial implant positions of all relevant implant components are determined / selected based on the surgeon's preferred surgical technique and the previously calculated anatomical landmarks. Also, a resection plane is created to simulate the osteotomy of the proximal femur and the fitting of the implant is evaluated. The fitting evaluation is performed by analyzing the cross-sections of the aligned implant and femoral intramedullary canal at different levels along the implant axis. The alignment of the implant to the femur is performed by aligning the implant axis to the femoral anatomical axis, and then translating the implant so that the neck of the implant is approximately at the neck of the proximal femur. The implant is then rotated around the femoral anatomical axis to achieve the desired anteversion.

[0136] As part of this implant placement step, the placement of the "educated guess" is evaluated by utilizing an iterative scheme that includes using an initial "educated guess" for implant placement as part of a kinematic simulation. In an exemplary embodiment, the kinematic simulation uses estimated or measured joint kinematics to perform a wide range of motion of the implant (based on the selected implant placement). The kinematic simulation may then be used to determine the impact location and estimate the resulting range of motion of the implant after impact. If the kinematic simulation results in unsatisfactory data (e.g., unsatisfactory range of motion, unsatisfactory imitation of natural motion, etc.), alternative locations for implant placement may be utilized to perform kinematic analysis to further refine the implant placement until a satisfactory result is reached. After the implant locations for all relevant implant components have been determined / selected, the template data is sent to a fixture generation module.

[0137] In the context of automatic placement of a femoral stem with a press fit and three contacts, as shown in FIG. 94, automatic labeling includes the definition of axes on the femur and the implant. For the femur, the anatomical femoral axis (AFA) is calculated, followed by the anatomical proximal axis (PAA). Then, the proximal neck angle (PNA) is calculated, which is defined as the angle between the AFA and the PNA. For the femoral implant, the implant axis is along the length of the implant stem, and the implant neck axis is along the length of the implant neck. Similar to the femoral PNA, the implant angle is defined as the angle between the implant axis and the implant neck axis. Then, the implant with the implant angle closest to the PNA is selected. Then, the implant fitting angle (IFA) is defined as the intersection of the anatomical proximal axis with the vector drawn from the femoral head center at the selected implant angle.

[0138] As shown in FIG. 94, when using automatic femoral stem placement with press-fit, three contacts, and calculated anatomical landmarks, the implant size assignment step determines / estimates the appropriate implant size for the pelvic and femoral components. The implant size is selected by aligning the implant with the femur by aligning the implant axis with the femoral anatomical axis, then rotating the implant to align its neck axis with the femoral neck axis, and then moving the implant to the anatomically correct position on the proximal femur. The system then proceeds to the implant placement step.

[0139] In the implant placement step of the press-fit femoral stem, the initial implant locations of all relevant implant components are determined / selected based on the surgeon's preferred surgical technique and previously calculated anatomical landmarks. A resection plane is also created to simulate the osteotomy of the proximal femur and the fitting of the implant is evaluated. The fitting is evaluated by analyzing the contours of the implant and femoral intramedullary canal. The contour is created by intersecting the intramedullary canal with a plane perpendicular to both the anatomical axis and the femoral neck axis, and passing through the intersection of the anatomical axis and the femoral neck axis to generate the contour. In generating the contours of the implant and intramedullary canal, a large number of correct implant size candidates are obtained by retaining only implants with a width smaller than the width of the intramedullary canal at the same location. The group of size candidates is reduced by two strategies to reduce the mean square distance error between the implant and the intramedullary canal. The first strategy minimizes the mean square error (MSE) or other mathematical error criterion of the distance between the inside and outside of the implant and the intramedullary canal. The second strategy minimizes the MSE of the distance between the implant and the outside of the intramedullary canal.

[0140] As part of this implant placement step, the placement of the "educated guess" is evaluated by utilizing an iterative scheme that includes using an initial "educated guess" for implant placement as part of a kinematic simulation. In an exemplary embodiment, the kinematic simulation uses estimated or measured joint kinematics to perform a wide range of motion of the implant (based on the selected implant placement). The kinematic simulation may then be used to determine the impact location and estimate the resulting range of motion of the implant after impact. If the kinematic simulation results in unsatisfactory data (e.g., unsatisfactory range of motion, unsatisfactory imitation of natural motion, etc.), alternative locations for implant placement may be utilized to perform kinematic analysis to further refine the implant placement until a satisfactory result is reached. After the implant locations for all relevant implant components have been determined / selected, the template data is sent to a fixture generation module.

[0141] Referring again to FIG. 87, the jig generation module generates a patient-specific guide model. More specifically, from the template data and associated planning parameters, the shape and placement of the patient-specific implant is known relative to the patient's remaining bone. As a result, the virtual templating module uses the patient-specific 3D bone model to calculate the position of the implant relative to the patient's remaining bone, thereby providing the jig generation module with information regarding the intended degree of retention of the patient's remaining bone. Consistent with this bone retention data, the jig generation module utilizes the bone retention data to apply one or more osteotomies to reduce the patient's current bone to the remaining bone required to accept the implant as planned. Using the intended osteotomies, the jig generation module generates a virtual 3D model of a cutting guide / jig having a shape configured to mate with the patient's bone in a single position and orientation. In other words, the 3D model of the cutting jig is created as a "negative" of the anatomical surface of the patient's remaining bone so that the tangible cutting guide fits precisely against the patient's anatomy. In this way, any guesswork associated with positioning the cutting jig is eliminated. The jig generation module generates a virtual 3D model of the cutting jig and then outputs the necessary machine code for a rapid prototyping machine, CNC machine, or similar equipment to manufacture a tangible cutting guide. As an example, an exemplary cutting jig for resecting the femoral head and neck includes a hollow slot that holds the cutting blade in a predetermined orientation that replicates the virtual cut from the surgical planning and templating module, along with associated guides that restrict the cutting blade within a certain range of motion. The jig generation module is also utilized to create a placement jig for the femoral stem.

[0142] Referring to FIG. 100, after the resection of the femoral head and neck, the intramedullary drilling is performed followed by the insertion of the femoral stem. To prepare the femur for the insertion of the femoral implant, the intramedullary canal needs to be drilled along an orientation that matches the orientation of the femoral implant. If the drilling is offset, the orientation of the femoral implant may be compromised. To address this issue, the jig generation module generates a virtual guide that is a "negative" of the anatomical surface of the patient's remaining or resected bone so that a rapid prototyping machine, CNC machine, or similar device can manufacture a cutting guide that precisely matches the patient's anatomy. As an example, the drilling jig may include an axial guide along which the reamer can run. Using this drilling jig, the surgeon performing the drilling procedure can be sure that the drilling is performed in the correct orientation.

[0143] The intramedullary canal may receive a femoral stem. Again, the jig generation module generates a femoral stem placement guide so that the femoral stem is properly positioned in terms of rotation and angle in the intramedullary canal. As an example, the femoral stem placement guide is a "negative" of the anatomical surface of the patient's remaining or resected bone and the top of the femoral stem. In this manner, the placement guide includes a unique shape that matches the patient's remaining or resected bone so that it slides over the femoral shaft (the portion of the femoral stem that connects to the femoral ball) while allowing only one orientation of the femoral stem relative to the patient's femur, thereby ensuring proper implantation of the femoral stem consistent with the preoperative plan. However, although the exemplary jig has been described in the context of a primary hip implant, one skilled in the art will appreciate that the exemplary process and system is not limited to primary hip implants, hip implants, or revision surgeries. Instead, the above process and system is applicable to any hip implant, as well as surgeries involving other areas of the body, such as, but not limited to, the knee, ankle, shoulder, spine, head, and elbow.

[0144] As shown in FIG. 101, in the context of an acetabulum, the jig generation module may generate instructions to manufacture an acetabular cup drilling and an acetabular implant placement guide. In particular, from the template data and associated planning parameters, the shape and location of the patient-specific acetabular implant is known relative to the patient's remaining pelvis. As a result, the virtual templating module uses the patient-specific 3D acetabulum model to calculate the size and location of the acetabular cup implant relative to the patient's remaining bone, thereby providing the jig generation module with information regarding the intended degree of retention of the patient's remaining pelvis and the desired implant orientation. Consistent with this bone retention data, the jig generation module utilizes the bone retention data to apply one or more osteotomies / drillings to reduce the patient's current pelvis to the remaining bone required to accept the acetabular implant as planned. Using the intended osteotomies, the jig generation module generates a virtual 3D model of a cutting guide / jig having a shape configured to mate with two portions of the patient's pelvis in only one orientation. In other words, a 3D model of the cutting jig is created as a "negative" of the anatomical surface of the patient's pelvis so that the tangible drilling guide fits precisely against the patient's anatomy. In this way, any guesswork associated with positioning the drilling jig is eliminated. After the jig generation module generates a virtual 3D model of the drilling jig, it outputs the necessary machine code for a rapid prototyping machine, CNC machine, or similar equipment to manufacture the tangible drilling jig. As an example, an exemplary acetabular component jig for drilling the acetabulum includes a four-piece structure, one configured to be received in the natural acetabulum and temporarily attached to a second one using the first one as a placement guide until the second one is secured to the pelvis. After the second one is secured to the pelvis, the first one may be removed. The third then includes a cylindrical or partially cylindrical element that uniquely matches the second and allows the reamer to travel longitudinally relative to the third, but whose orientation is fixed by the combination of the first and third. After drilling, the reamer is removed and the third is removed from the first.A fourth is then used to attach the acetabular cup implant to the drilled acetabulum. In particular, the fourth is uniquely shaped to engage with the first in only one orientation while being configured to be received within the acetabular cup implant. After the implant cup is positioned, both the first and fourth are removed. It should also be noted that another tool can be created to drill one or more holes in the pelvis for seating the acetabular implant, and each drill tool can be installed in place of the first to confirm the orientation of the drill bit.

[0145] Surgical Navigation 103-111 illustrate another exemplary system and process for facilitating surgical navigation using one or more inertial measurement units (IMUs) to precisely position orthopedic surgical instruments and orthopedic implants during a surgical procedure. This first alternative exemplary embodiment is described in the context of performing a total hip arthroplasty. Again, the methods, systems, and processes described below are applicable to any other surgical procedure in which guidance of surgical instruments and implants is useful.

[0146] As shown diagrammatically, the initial steps of utilizing patient images (whether x-ray, CT, MRI, etc.) and segmenting or registering to arrive at a virtual template of the patient's anatomy and appropriate implant size, shape, and placement are comparable to those described above with reference to Figures 87, 88, and 90-92. What differs slightly are the modules and processes utilized downstream of the virtual templating module.

[0147] Downstream of the virtual templating module is an initialization model generation module, which receives the template data and associated planning parameters (i.e., the shape and position of the patient-specific acetabular implant is known relative to the patient's remaining pelvis, as well as the shape and position of the patient-specific femoral implant is known relative to the patient's remaining femur). Using this patient-specific information, the initialization model generation module produces a 3D virtual model of the initialization device relative to the patient's natural acetabular cup and a 3D virtual model of the initialization device relative to the femoral implant. In other words, it creates a 3D model of the acetabular initialization device as a "negative" of the anatomical surface of the patient's acetabulum, so that the tangible initialization device fits precisely to the patient's acetabulum. Similarly, it creates a 3D model of the femoral stem initialization device as a "negative" of the anatomical surface of the patient's remaining femur and femoral implant, so that the tangible initialization device fits precisely to the patient's remaining femur and femoral implant, at only a single location and in a single orientation. In addition to generating these initialization devices, the initialization model generation module also generates the necessary machine code for a rapid prototyping machine, CNC machine, or similar machine to manufacture the tangible acetabular and femoral initialization devices for attachment (or simultaneous or integral formation) or integration with a surgical navigation instrument configured with at least one IMU 1002.

[0148] The IMUs 1002 capable of reporting orientation and movement data are combined (e.g., attached) with surgical instruments to aid in surgical navigation, including positioning of surgical and implanted instruments. These IMUs 1002 are communicatively coupled (wired or wireless) to a software system that receives output data from the IMU indicating relative velocity and time that allows calculation of its current position and orientation, or calculates and transmits the position and orientation (discussed in more detail below) of a surgical instrument associated with the IMU. In this exemplary illustration, each IMU 1002 includes three gyroscopes, three accelerometers, and three Hall effect magnetometers (a trio of 3-axis gyroscopes, accelerometers, magnetometers) that can be integrated into a single circuit board or configured on separate boards of one or more sensors (e.g., gyroscopes, accelerometers, magnetometers), and output data regarding three mutually perpendicular directions (e.g., X, Y, Z directions). Thus, each IMU 1002 operates to generate 21 voltage or numerical outputs from three gyroscopes, three accelerometers, and three Hall-effect magnetometers. In an exemplary embodiment, each IMU 1002 includes a sensor board and a processing board, where the sensor board includes an integrated sensing module (LSM9DS, ST-Microelectronics) consisting of three accelerometers, three gyroscopes, and three magnetometers, and two integrated sensing modules (LSM303, ST-Microelectronics) consisting of three accelerometers and three magnetometers. In particular, each IMU 1002 includes an angular momentum sensor that measures changes in spatial rotational orientation about at least three axes: pitch (up and down), yaw (side to side), and roll (clockwise or counterclockwise rotation). More specifically, each magnetometer constituting the integrated sensing module is positioned at a different location on the circuit board and assigned to output a voltage proportional to an applied magnetic field and to sense the polarity of the magnetic field at a spatial point for each of three directions in a three-dimensional coordinate system, for example, a first magnetometer outputs a voltage proportional to an applied magnetic field and the polarity of the magnetic field in the X-, Y-, and Z-directions at a first location.Meanwhile, the second magnetometer outputs a voltage proportional to the applied magnetic field and the polarity direction of the magnetic field in the X, Y, and Z directions at the second location, and the third magnetometer outputs a voltage proportional to the applied magnetic field and the polarity direction of the magnetic field in the X, Y, and Z directions at the third location. These three magnetometers may be used to determine the traveling orientation of the IMU in addition to detecting the variations in the local magnetic field. Each magnetometer uses the magnetic field as a reference to determine the deviation of the orientation from magnetic north. However, the local magnetic field can be distorted by steel or magnetic materials, commonly referred to as hardened and softened iron distortion. Examples of softened iron distortion are materials with low magnetic permeability such as carbon steel, stainless steel, etc. Hardened iron distortion is caused by permanent magnets. These distortions create non-uniform fields (see FIG. 184) that affect the accuracy of the algorithms used to process the magnetometer outputs and determine the traveling orientation. As a result, the magnetometers are calibrated using a calibration algorithm, as discussed in more detail below, to restore uniformity in the detected magnetic field. Each IMU 1002 may be powered by a replaceable or rechargeable energy storage device, such as, but not limited to, a CR2032 coin cell battery and a 200 mAh rechargeable Li-ion battery.

[0149] The integrated sensing module of the IMU 1002 may include a configurable signal conditioning circuit and an analog-to-digital converter (ADC) that generates a numerical output of the sensor. The IMU 1002 may use a sensor with a voltage output, and the external signal conditioning circuit may be an offset amplifier configured to adjust the sensor output to the input range of a multi-channel 24-bit analog-to-digital converter (ADC) (ADS1258, Texas Instruments). Additionally, the IMU 1002 includes an integrated processing module (CC2541, Texas Instruments) that includes a microcontroller and a wireless transmission module. Alternatively, the IMU 1002 may use a separate low-power microcontroller (MSP430F2274, Texas Instruments) as the processor and a small wireless transmission module (A2500R24A, Anaren) for communication. The processor may be integrated as part of each IMU 1002 or may be separate from each IMU but communicatively coupled to the IMU. The processor may be Bluetooth® enabled and provide wired or wireless communication to the gyroscope, accelerometer, and magnetometer, as well as wired or wireless communication to the signal receiver.

[0150] Each IMU 1002 is communicatively coupled to a signal receiver, which processes the received data from multiple IMUs using a predefined device identification number. The data rate is approximately 100 Hz for a single IMU and decreases as more IMUs are connected to the shared network. The signal receiver software receives signals from the IMUs 1002 in real time and continuously calculates the current position of the IMU based on the received IMU data. Specifically, the current velocity of the IMU in each of the three axes is calculated by integrating the acceleration measurements output from the IMU with respect to time. The current position is calculated by integrating the calculated velocity for each axis with respect to time. However, to obtain useful position data, a frame of reference must be established that includes the calibration of each IMU.

[0151] The present disclosure includes a novel system and method for calibrating one or more IMUs for use in surgical navigation. Previous patent literature utilizing IMUs as intended aids in surgical navigation has suffered from inoperability for a number of reasons, including placement of the IMU relative to metallic surgical instruments as well as lack of IMU calibration. More specifically, in the context of IMUs with built-in magnetometers, local calibration of the magnetometer is essential for motion tracking of surgical instruments and associated orthopedic components.

[0152] Referring to FIG. 180, in accordance with the present disclosure, a novel calibration instrument 1000 is utilized to calibrate one or more IMUs 1002, which may incorporate magnetometers. In an exemplary form, the calibration instrument 1000 includes a fixed base 1006 housing a controller 1008, a motor 1012, a gearing 1016, a drive shaft 1020, and a power source 1024. The drive shaft 1020, like the motor 1012, is attached to a portion of the gearing 1016 such that the motor operates to both drive the gearing and rotate the drive shaft. In particular, the motor 1012 includes an electric motor having a single drive shaft to which a drive gear of the gearing 1016 is attached. The drive gear engages an auxiliary gear attached to the drive shaft 1020 such that the rotational motion of the motor 1012 is converted to rotational motion of the drive shaft 1020.

[0153] In this exemplary configuration, the fixed base 1006 includes a circular exterior partially defining a hollow interior that houses the motor 1012, gearing 1016, controller 1008, power supply 1024, and a portion of the drive shaft 1020. By way of example, a central vertical axis extends through the fixed base 1006 that is coaxial with the central axis of the drive shaft 1020. This coaxial alignment reduces vibrations that arise as a result of rotation of the drive shaft 1020 relative to the fixed base 1006. The rotation of the drive shaft 1020 acts to rotate the outer stage 1030 relative to the fixed base 1006.

[0154] In the exemplary embodiment, a ring-shaped bearing plate 1034 is interposed between the top of the fixed base 1006 and the bottom of the outer stage 1030. Both the fixed base 1006 and the bearing plate 1034 have corresponding axial openings that allow a portion of the drive shaft 1020 to pass through. The end of the drive shaft 1020 proximate the outer stage 1030 is attached to a slip ring 1038, which is attached to the outer stage. Thus, rotation of the drive shaft 1020 relative to the fixed base 1006 causes the outer stage 1030 to rotate about a central vertical axis. As discussed in more detail below, the IMU 1002 is calibrated in part by rotation about the central vertical axis.

[0155] In this exemplary embodiment, the outer stage 1030 includes a block U-shaped profile with corresponding opposing fork-shaped appendages 1042. Each appendage 1042 is mounted to a roller bearing assembly 1046 that receives a central shaft 1050 and is pivotally mounted to the central shaft 1050. Each central shaft 1050 is simultaneously mounted to an opposite side of an inner platform 1054 located between the fork-shaped appendages 1042. The inner platform 1054 includes a block U-shaped profile with a base that fits over the corresponding opposing fork-shaped appendages 1042 and has a number of upstanding protrusions 1058. As discussed in more detail below, each of the upstanding protrusions 1058 is configured to engage a corresponding recess associated with each IMU 1002 to fix the position of the IMU relative to a portion of the calibration fixture 1000. Each central shaft 1050 is longitudinally aligned along a central axis and mounted to the inner platform 1054 such that rotation of the central shaft coincides with rotation of the inner platform 1054 relative to the outer stage 1030.

[0156] To rotate the inner platform 1054 relative to the outer stage 1030, the calibration fixture includes a pulley 1060 mounted on one of the central shafts 1050. In particular, one of the central shafts 1050 is longer than the other to accommodate the mounting of the pulley 1060 and corresponding rotation of the pulley by a drive belt 1064 simultaneously engaged with an electric motor 1068. In this exemplary embodiment, the output shaft of the electric motor 1068 is mounted on its own pulley 1072 and engages the drive belt 1064, ultimately rotating the pulley 1060 and correspondingly rotating the inner platform 1054 relative to the outer stage 1030 (about the longitudinally aligned central axis of the central shaft 1050) when the electric motor is powered. The electric motor 1068 is mounted on a motor mount 1076 that extends from the bottom of the outer stage 1030 to the underside of one of the fork-like appendages 1042. As discussed in more detail below, the IMU 1002 is calibrated in part by rotation of the inner platform 1054 relative to the outer stage 1030, and thus by rotation of the IMU about a central longitudinal axis perpendicular to the central vertical axis. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that a third axis of rotation may be introduced to rotate the IMU about an axis perpendicular to both the central longitudinal axis and the longitudinal vertical axis. An exemplary calibration sequence for calibrating one or more IMUs 1002 using the calibration tool 1000 is described below.

[0157] In an exemplary embodiment, the IMU 1002 is preferably calibrated in close proximity to the ultimate point of use in surgical navigation. This may be in the operating room, or more specifically, next to the patient bed where the patient is intended to or actually lies. The calibration of the IMU is location specific, such that calibration away from the intended point of use may significantly disperse the magnetic field at the calibration point and the area of ​​use (i.e., the surgical area). As a result, it is preferable to calibrate the IMU 1002 close to the area of ​​use.

[0158] Using the novel calibration fixture 1000, each IMU 1002 is mounted to one of the upright projections 1058 of the inner platform 1054. By way of example, each IMU 1002 is mounted to a housing having a shaped periphery that contours an open bottom. The shaped periphery of the IMU 1002 housing is configured to outline the periphery of the upright projection 1058 so that the IMU housing can snap-fit ​​over the corresponding upright projection to maintain engagement of the IMU housing and the inner platform 1054 during the calibration sequence. By way of example, the IMU housing may have an outer periphery with rectangular, triangular, rectangular, etc. sides that engage with the corresponding upright projection 1058. As an exemplary description and explanation, the IMU housing has a rectangular opening contoured with a constant vertical cross-section that is slightly larger than the rectangular cross-section of the upright projection 1058. In an exemplary embodiment, the calibration fixture 1000 includes four upright projections 1058 to allow for simultaneous calibration of four IMUs 1002. However, it should be noted that more or less than four upstanding protrusions 1058 may be included as part of the inner platform 1054 to allow for simultaneous calibration of one or more IMUs.

[0159] The goal of the calibration sequence is to establish zero for the accelerometers (meaning that at a stationary position, the accelerometers provide data consistent with zero acceleration) and map the local magnetic field to normalize the magnetometer output to account for directional variance and distortion of the sensed magnetic field. To calibrate the IMU 1002 accelerometers, the inner platform 1054 is held stationary relative to the outer stage 1030, which is held stationary relative to the fixed base 1006. A number of measurements are taken from all accelerometers with the inner platform 1054 at a first fixed stationary position relative to the outer stage 1030. The inner stage is then moved to a second fixed stationary position relative to the outer stage 1030 and a second set of measurements is taken from all accelerometers. The output of the accelerometers at the multiple fixed positions is recorded and utilized on an accelerometer specific basis to establish zero acceleration measurements for the applicable accelerometers. In addition to establishing a zero for the accelerometer, the calibration sequence also maps the local magnetic field and normalizes the magnetometer output to account for directional dispersion and distortion of the sensed magnetic field.

[0160] To map the local magnetic field of each magnetometer (assuming the magnetometers of each IMU 1002 are positioned at different locations), the outer stage 1030 is rotated about the drive axis 1020 and the central vertical axis relative to the fixed base 1006, and the inner platform 1054 is rotated about the central axis 1050 and the central axis relative to the outer stage 1030. Output data from each magnetometer is recorded while rotating the inner platform 1054 about the two mutually perpendicular axes. Repositioning each magnetometer about the two perpendicular axes generates a point cloud and map of the three-dimensional local magnetic field sensed by each magnetometer. Figures (calibration figures 1-3) show exemplary local magnetic fields mapped from isometric, front, and top views based on data received from the magnetometers while rotating in two axes simultaneously. As reflected in the local magnetic field map, the local map embodies an ellipsoid. This ellipsoidal shape is the result of distortion of the local magnetic field due to the presence of steel or magnetic materials, commonly referred to as hardening and softening iron distortion. Examples of softening iron distortion are materials with low magnetic permeability such as carbon steel, stainless steel, etc. Hardening iron distortion is caused by materials such as permanent magnets.

[0161] However, with respect to the distortion of the local magnetic field, it is assumed that the local magnetic field map is spherical. As a result, the calibration sequence operates by manual manipulation of the calibration instrument 1000 or the IMU to collect enough data points to describe the local magnetic field at various orientations, and the calibration algorithm calculates correction factors to map the distorted elliptical local magnetic field to a uniform spherical field.

[0162] Referring to FIG. 184, multiple magnetometers positioned as part of the IMU 1002 at different locations are used to detect the local magnetic field after calibration is complete. In the absence of any magnetic field distortion, each magnetometer should provide data indicating the exact same direction, such as magnetic north. However, distortions of the local magnetic field, such as the presence of steel or magnetic materials (e.g., surgical tools), will cause the magnetometers to provide different data regarding the direction of magnetic north. In other words, if the magnetometer output does not uniformly reflect magnetic north, distortion has occurred and the IMU 1002 may temporarily disable the magnetometer data from being used in the tracking algorithm. The user may also be alerted that a distortion has been detected.

[0163] 185 and 186, exemplary surgical instruments that receive an IMU 1002 include an electrical switch pattern or grid that is unique to each instrument. More specifically, each surgical instrument includes a protrusion having a mostly planar upper surface, except for one or more cylindrical cavities. In an exemplary form, each IMU 1002 includes a housing that defines a bottom opening configured to receive the protrusion of the surgical instrument. The bottom opening includes four switches, each including a biased cylindrical button that, when pressed, closes the switch and transmits a corresponding signal to the processor of the IMU 1002. Conversely, when the button is not pressed, the switch remains open and no signal corresponding to the switch closure is transmitted to the processor of the IMU 1002. In this manner, the processor determines which switches are open and which are closed and uses this information to identify the surgical instrument to which the IMU 1002 is attached.

[0164] As part of the identification of the surgical instrument, 0-4 switches may be pressed depending on the shape of the top surface of the prong. As shown in the graphic representation, the prong is received in the bottom opening of the housing of the IMU 1002 such that the top surface of the prong is pressed adjacent to the switch. It is noted that the prong and bottom opening of the housing of the IMU 1002 are configured such that the prong is received in the bottom opening in only a single rotational orientation, thereby limiting the possibility of misalignment between the prong and the switch that may lead to misidentification of the surgical instrument.

[0165] In particular, as shown in FIG. 185, the calibration adaptor surgical instrument includes a single cylindrical cavity positioned near the right front corner of the prong (opposite the milled corner) to provide a unique configuration. Thus, when the prong of the calibration adaptor surgical instrument is received in the bottom opening of the housing of the IMU 1002, only a single switch of the 2&2 switch grid is actuated closest to the right front corner of the housing of the IMU 1002, thereby informing the processor of the IMU 1002 that the IMU 1002 is attached to the calibration adaptor surgical instrument. In contrast, the patient anatomy mapping (PAM) alignment instrument adaptor surgical instrument includes two cylindrical cavities positioned near the right front and right rear corners of the prong in a second unique configuration. Thus, when the prong of the PAM adaptor surgical instrument is received in the bottom opening of the housing of the IMU 1002, only two switches of the 2&2 switch grid are actuated closest to the right side of the housing of the IMU 1002, thereby informing the processor of the IMU 1002 that the IMU 1002 is attached to the PAM adaptor surgical instrument. In addition, the reamer adaptor surgical instrument includes two cylindrical cavities positioned near the front of the prong (i.e., adjacent the left front and right front corners). Thus, when the prong of the reamer adaptor surgical instrument is received in the bottom opening of the housing of the IMU 1002, only two switches of the 2&2 switch grid are actuated closest to the front of the housing of the IMU 1002, thereby informing the processor of the IMU 1002 that the IMU 1002 is attached to the reamer adaptor surgical instrument. Finally, the impactor adaptor surgical instrument includes three cylindrical cavities positioned near the front and right side of the prong (i.e., adjacent the left front, right front, and right rear corners). Thus, when the protrusions of the impactor adapter surgical instrument are received in the bottom opening of the IMU 1002 housing, only the three switches of the 2&2 switch grid closest to the front and right side of the IMU 1002 housing are actuated, thereby informing the IMU 1002 processor that the IMU 1002 is attached to the impactor adapter surgical instrument.One skilled in the art will appreciate the variations that can be provided by providing a number of switches or electrical contacts as part of the IMU 1002 that match the number of protrusions, cavities, or electrical contacts associated with the surgical instrument, thereby clearly identifying the surgical instrument to which the IMU 1002 is attached.

[0166] Identification of the surgical instrument to which the IMU 1002 is attached is important for accurate surgical navigation. In particular, the surgical navigation system according to the present disclosure includes a software package pre-loaded with a CAD or surface model of each surgical instrument to which the IMU 1002 can be attached, in some cases. Thus, the software package knows the relative dimensions of each surgical instrument, such as length in the X direction, width in the Y direction, and height in the Z direction, and how these dimensions vary along the length, width, and height of the surgical instrument. Thus, when the IMU 1002 is attached to a surgical instrument in a known position, the position and orientation information (from the gyroscope, accelerometer, and magnetometer) from the IMU 1002 can be translated into position and orientation information of the surgical instrument. Thus, by tracking the IMU 1002 in 3D space, the software package can track the surgical instrument to which the IMU 1002 is attached in 3D space and communicate this position and orientation to a user, such as a surgeon or a surgeon's assistant.

[0167] In an exemplary embodiment, the software package includes a visual display operative to display each surgical instrument as a 3D model. When an IMU 1002 is attached to a surgical instrument, the processor of the IMU 1002 transmits data to the software package capable of identifying the surgical instrument to which the IMU 1002 is attached. After this identification, the software package displays a 3D model of the surgical instrument attached to the IMU 1002 in an orientation consistent with the orientation information derived from the IMU. In addition to manipulating the 3D virtual model of the surgical instrument in real time to provide orientation information, the software package also uses a second reference IMU 1002 attached to a reference object (i.e., a bone of the patient) to provide real-time data regarding the position of the surgical instrument. However, the IMUs 1002 (IMU #1 attached to the surgical instrument and IMU #2 attached to the reference object (i.e., bone)) must be aligned with each other before the software package can provide meaningful position information.

[0168] In an exemplary embodiment in the context of total hip arthroplasty, as shown in Figs. 103-110, the alignment tools are utilized to recreate the template surgical plan by engaging the patient anatomy in a predefined orientation. When each practical IMU 1002 is attached to its alignment tool (one to the femur, the second to the pelvis), the alignment tool is attached to the associated bone in the predefined orientation (only one orientation that "zeroes" the IMU by precisely matching it to the patient anatomy). To perform this alignment, a second reference IMU is rigidly attached to the bone in question (one IMU is attached to the pelvis and a second IMU is attached to the femur). In other words, one practical IMU is attached to the acetabular alignment tool while a second reference IMU is rigidly attached to the pelvis. In the context of the femur, one practical IMU is attached to the femoral alignment tool while a second reference IMU is rigidly attached to the femur. As part of the alignment process, the computer software uses the output from both IMUs (actual and reference) to calculate the "zero" position of the actual IMU when the alignment tool is finally at rest and positioned in its unique position and orientation. The IMU 1002 may then be detached from its associated alignment tool and attached to a surgical tool (reamer, saw, implant placement guide, etc.) in a predetermined manner to ensure proper orientation and placement of the surgical tool. The IMU 1002 may also be successively attached and detached to each surgical tool until the surgical procedure is completed.

[0169] In this exemplary embodiment, the acetabular alignment tool comprises an elongated shaft with a unique protrusion shaped to fit the patient's acetabular cup in only a single orientation (including rotational and angular positions). The alignment tool includes an IMU 1002 alignment holster at its proximal end for receiving the IMU 1002 such that the IMU 1002 is rigidly fixed relative to the alignment tool and the unique protrusion when the IMU 1002 is locked within the holster. A second reference IMU 1002 is rigidly fixed relative to the pelvis in a known position in agreement with the alignment tool. When the unique projection of the alignment tool is correctly oriented with the patient's acetabular cup (and the IMU 1002 locked in the alignment holster and the IMU 1002 attached to the pelvis are activated), the orientation of the IMU 1002 locked in the alignment holster with respect to the planned implant cup orientation (set when the unique projection is received in the acetabular cup in only the single correct orientation) is known. The operator indicates to the software system that the IMUs are in the correct position, and the software records the position of each IMU. The alignment tool (with the IMU 1002 locked in the holster) is then removed from the anatomy, and the IMU 1002 is removed from the alignment holster in preparation for attachment of the IMU 1002 to the surgical tool.

[0170] As an example, an IMU 1002 previously attached to an acetabular alignment tool is removed from the tool and attached to a surgical tool in a known position. In an exemplary embodiment, the IMU 1002 (previously attached to the acetabular alignment tool) is rigidly fixed to a cup reamer with a known orientation relative to the drilling direction, such that the orientation of the cup reamer relative to the pelvis is known and dynamically updated by both IMUs (the IMU 1002 attached to the cup reamer and the IMU 1002 attached to the pelvis).

[0171] The software program provides a graphical user interface for the surgeon that displays a virtual model of the patient's pelvis and a virtual model of the surgical instrument in question (in this case a cup reamer) (the virtual model of the patient's pelvis has already been completed through a virtual templating step, and the virtual model of the surgical instrument, such as a cup reamer, has previously been loaded into the system for the particular surgical instrument, such as a cup reamer, available), and updates the orientation of the pelvis and surgical instrument in real time with the graphical user interface providing position and orientation information to the surgeon. Rather than using a graphical user interface, the system may include a surgical instrument with indicator lights that indicate to the surgeon whether the reamer is correctly oriented and, if not, the direction in which the reamer needs to be repositioned to properly orient it in alignment with the preoperative plan. After completion of the faceting with the cup reamer, the IMU 1002 is removed from the cup reamer and rigidly fixed to the cup inserter with a known orientation relative to the insertion direction. The cup inserter is then used to place the cup implant while the IMU continues to provide acceleration feedback that the software uses to perform position calculations to provide real-time feedback on the position of the pelvis relative to the cup inserter. To the extent that the pelvis is drilled before or after the cup is positioned, the IMU 1002 previously attached to the alignment tool may be rigidly fixed to the surgical drill to ensure the correct orientation of the drill relative to the pelvis. A similar alignment tool and IMU set may also be used in conjunction with a software system to assist in the placement of femoral stem components.

[0172] In an exemplary embodiment, the femoral alignment tool comprises an elongated shaft having a distal shape shaped to fit partially against the patient's femoral neck in only a single orientation (including rotational and angular positions). The alignment tool includes an IMU 1002 alignment holster at its proximal end for receiving the IMU 1002 such that the IMU 1002 is rigidly fixed relative to the alignment tool and the distal shape when the IMU 1002 is locked within the holster. A second reference IMU 1002 is rigidly fixed relative to the femur in a known position in agreement with the alignment tool. When the distal shape of the alignment tool is correctly oriented relative to the femoral neck (and the IMU 1002 locked in the alignment holster and the IMU 1002 attached to the femur are activated), the orientation of the IMU 1002 locked to the alignment holster relative to the femoral orientation (set when the distal shape is received on the femoral neck in only the single correct orientation) is known. The operator indicates to the software system that the IMUs are in the correct position, and the software records the position of each IMU. The alignment tool (with the IMU 1002 locked to the holster) is then removed from the anatomy, and the IMU 1002 is removed from the alignment holster in preparation for attachment of the IMU 1002 to the surgical tool.

[0173] As an example, the IMU 1002 previously attached to the femoral alignment tool is removed from the tool and attached to another surgical tool in a known position. In an exemplary embodiment, the IMU 1002 (previously attached to the femoral alignment tool) is rigidly fixed to the surgical saw in a known position such that the movement of the IMU 1002 is correspondingly translated into a known movement of the surgical saw. Assuming the other IMU 1002 is rigidly attached to the femur in a known position, the IMUs cooperate to provide dynamic updates to the software system regarding the changing positions of both the femur and the surgical saw (via acceleration data).

[0174] The software program provides a graphical user interface for the surgeon that displays a virtual model of the patient's femur and a virtual model of the surgical instrument in question (in this case a surgical saw) (the virtual model of the patient's femur has already been completed through a virtual templating step, and the virtual model of the surgical instrument has previously been loaded into the system for the particular surgical instrument available), and updates the orientation of the femur and the surgical instrument in real time with the graphical user interface providing position and orientation information to the surgeon. Rather than using a graphical user interface, the system may include a surgical instrument with indicator lights that show the surgeon whether the surgical saw is correctly oriented and, if not, the direction in which the surgical saw needs to be repositioned to properly orient it in alignment with the preoperative plan and make the correct bone cut. After the required bone cut, the IMU 1002 is removed from the surgical saw and rigidly fixed to the reamer (to properly drill the intramedullary canal) and then attached to a femoral stem inserter with a known orientation relative to the insertion direction. The stem inserter is then used to place the femoral stem implant into the drilled intramedullary canal, with the IMU providing continuous acceleration feedback that the software uses to calculate the position of the femur and the stem inserter in real time and display this position data to the surgeon via a graphical user interface.

[0175] In an exemplary embodiment in the context of total shoulder arthroplasty, the alignment fixtures are utilized to recreate the template surgical plan by engaging the patient anatomy in a predefined orientation, as shown in FIG. 187 and FIG. 188. When each practical IMU 1002 is attached to its alignment fixture (one to the humerus, the second to the scapula), the alignment fixture is attached to the associated bone in the predefined orientation (only one orientation that "zeroes" the IMU by precisely matching it to the patient anatomy). To perform this alignment, a second reference IMU is rigidly attached to the bone in question (one IMU attached to the humerus, and a second IMU attached to the scapula). In other words, one practical IMU is attached to the humerus alignment fixture, while the second reference IMU is rigidly attached to the humerus. In the context of the scapula, one practical IMU is attached to the scapula alignment fixture, while the second reference IMU is rigidly attached to the scapula. As part of the alignment process, the computer software uses the output from both IMUs (actual and reference) to calculate the "zero" position of the actual IMU when the alignment tool is finally at rest and positioned in its unique position and orientation. The IMU 1002 may then be detached from its associated alignment tool and attached to a surgical tool (reamer, saw, implant placement guide, etc.) in a predetermined manner to ensure proper orientation and placement of the surgical tool. The IMU 1002 may also be successively attached and detached to each surgical tool until the surgical procedure is completed.

[0176] In this exemplary embodiment, as shown in FIGURE 188, the scapular alignment instrument comprises an elongated shaft with a unique protrusion shaped to fit into the patient's glenoid cavity in only a single orientation (including rotational and angular positions). The proximal end of the alignment instrument comprises an IMU 1002 alignment holster for receiving the IMU 1002 such that the IMU 1002 is rigidly fixed relative to the alignment instrument and the unique protrusion when the IMU 1002 is locked within the holster. In agreement with the alignment instrument, a second reference IMU 1002 is rigidly fixed relative to the scapula at a known position. When the unique projection of the alignment tool is correctly oriented in the patient's glenoid (and the IMU 1002 locked in the alignment holster and the IMU 1002 attached to the scapula are activated), the orientation of the IMU 1002 locked in the alignment holster relative to the planned implant cup orientation (set when the unique projection of the alignment tool is received in the glenoid in only the single correct orientation) is known. The operator indicates to the software system that the IMUs are in the correct position, and the software records the position of each IMU. The alignment tool (with the IMU 1002 locked in the holster) is then removed from the anatomy, and the IMU 1002 is removed from the alignment holster in preparation for attachment of the working IMU 1002 to other surgical tools.

[0177] As an example, an IMU 1002 previously attached to a scapular alignment tool is removed from the tool and attached to a surgical tool in a known position. In an exemplary configuration, the IMU 1002 (previously attached to the scapular alignment tool) is rigidly fixed to a cup reamer whose orientation relative to the drilling direction is known, such that the orientation of the cup reamer relative to the scapula is known and dynamically updated by both IMUs (the cup reamer attached IMU 1002 and the pelvis attached IMU 1002).

[0178] The software program provides a graphical user interface for the surgeon to display a virtual model of the patient's scapula and a virtual model of the surgical instrument in question (in this case the cup reamer) (the virtual model of the patient's scapula has already been completed through the virtual templating step, and the virtual model of the surgical instrument such as the cup reamer has been previously loaded into the system for the particular surgical instrument such as the cup reamer available), and updates the orientation of the scapula and surgical instrument in real time with the graphical user interface providing position and orientation information to the surgeon. Rather than using a graphical user interface, the system may include a surgical instrument with indicator lights that show the surgeon whether the reamer is correctly oriented and, if not, the direction in which the reamer needs to be repositioned to properly orient it consistent with the preoperative plan. After completion of the faceting with the cup reamer, the practical IMU 1002 is removed from the cup reamer and rigidly fixed to the cup inserter whose orientation relative to the insertion direction is known. The cup inserter is then utilized to place the cup implant, while the IMU continues to provide acceleration feedback utilized by the software to perform position calculations and provide real time feedback on the position of the scapula relative to the cup inserter. To the extent that the scapula is drilled before or after positioning of the cup, the utility IMU 1002 previously attached to the alignment tool may be rigidly fixed to the surgical drill to ensure correct orientation of the drill relative to the scapula. A similar alignment tool and IMU set may also be used in conjunction with a software system to assist in the placement of the humeral stem component.

[0179] In an exemplary embodiment, the humerus alignment tool comprises an elongate shaft having a distal shape shaped to fit partially against the patient's humeral neck in only a single orientation (including rotational and angular positions). The alignment tool includes an IMU 1002 alignment holster at its proximal end for receiving the IMU 1002 such that the IMU 1002 is rigidly fixed relative to the alignment tool and the distal shape when the IMU 1002 is locked in the holster. A second reference IMU 1002 is rigidly fixed relative to the humerus in a known position in agreement with the alignment tool. When the alignment tool is correctly oriented relative to the humeral neck (and the IMU 1002 locked in the alignment holster and the reference IMU 1002 attached to the humerus are activated), the orientation of the IMU 1002 locked to the alignment holster relative to the humeral orientation (set when the distal shape is received on the humeral neck in only the single correct orientation) is known. The operator indicates to the software system that the IMUs are resting in the correct position, and the software records the position of each IMU to establish a reference orientation for the preliminary planned orientation. The alignment tool (with the IMU 1002 locked to the holster) is then removed from the anatomy, and the working IMU 1002 is removed from the alignment holster in preparation for attachment of the IMU 1002 to other surgical tools.

[0180] As an example, the IMU 1002 previously attached to the humerus alignment tool is removed from the tool and attached to another surgical tool in a known position. In an exemplary embodiment, the IMU 1002 (previously attached to the humerus alignment tool) is rigidly fixed to the surgical saw in a known position such that the movement of the IMU 1002 is correspondingly translated to a known movement of the surgical saw. Assuming the reference IMU 1002 is rigidly attached to the humerus in a known position, the IMUs cooperate to provide dynamic updates to the software system regarding the changing positions of both the humerus and the surgical saw (via acceleration data).

[0181] The software program provides a graphical user interface for the surgeon that displays a virtual model of the patient's humerus and a virtual model of the surgical instrument in question (in this case a surgical saw) (the virtual model of the patient's humerus has already been completed through a virtual templating step, and the virtual model of the surgical instrument has previously been loaded into the system for the particular surgical instrument available), and updates the orientation of the humerus and the surgical instrument in real time with the graphical user interface providing position and orientation information to the surgeon. Rather than using a graphical user interface, the system may include a surgical instrument with indicator lights that show the surgeon whether the surgical saw is correctly oriented and, if not, the direction in which the surgical saw needs to be repositioned to properly orient it in alignment with the pre-operative plan and make the correct bone cut. After the required bone cut, the practical IMU 1002 is removed from the surgical saw and rigidly fixed to the reamer (to properly drill the humeral canal) before being attached to a humeral stem inserter with a known orientation relative to the insertion direction. The stem inserter is then used to place the humeral stem implant into the drill canal, with the IMU continually providing acceleration feedback that the software uses to calculate the position of the humerus and stem inserter in real time and display this position data to the surgeon via a graphical user interface.

[0182] In an exemplary embodiment in the context of reverse shoulder implant surgery, the alignment fixtures are utilized to recreate the template surgical plan by engaging the patient anatomy in a predefined orientation, as shown in FIG. 189 and FIG. 190. When each practical IMU 1002 is attached to its alignment fixture (one to the humerus, the second to the scapula), the alignment fixture is attached to the associated bone in the predefined orientation (only one orientation that precisely matches the patient anatomy to make the IMU "zero"). To perform this alignment, a second reference IMU is rigidly attached to the bone in question (one IMU attached to the humerus, and a second IMU attached to the scapula). In other words, one practical IMU is attached to the humerus alignment fixture, while the second reference IMU is rigidly attached to the humerus. In the context of the scapula, one practical IMU is attached to the scapula alignment fixture, while the second reference IMU is rigidly attached to the scapula. As part of the alignment process, the computer software uses the output from both IMUs (actual and reference) to calculate the "zero" position of the actual IMU when the alignment tool is finally at rest and positioned in its unique position and orientation. The IMU 1002 may then be detached from its associated alignment tool and attached to a surgical tool (reamer, saw, inserter, drill guide, drill, etc.) in a predetermined manner to ensure proper orientation and placement of the surgical tool. The IMU 1002 may also be successively attached and detached to each surgical tool until the surgical procedure is completed.

[0183] In this exemplary embodiment, as shown in Fig. 188, the scapular alignment device comprises an elongated shaft with a unique protrusion shaped to fit the patient's glenoid cavity in only one orientation (including rotational and angular positions). The proximal end of the alignment device comprises an IMU 1002 alignment holster for receiving the IMU 1002 such that the IMU 1002 is rigidly fixed relative to the alignment device and the unique protrusion when the IMU 1002 is locked within the holster. In agreement with the alignment device, a second reference IMU 1002 is rigidly fixed relative to the scapula at a known position. When the unique projection of the alignment tool is correctly oriented in the patient's glenoid (and the IMU 1002 locked in the alignment holster and the IMU 1002 attached to the scapula are activated), the orientation of the IMU 1002 locked in the alignment holster relative to the planned implant cup orientation (set when the unique projection is received in the glenoid in only the single correct orientation) is known. The operator indicates to the software system that the IMUs are in the correct position, and the software records the position of each IMU. The alignment tool (with the IMU 1002 locked in the holster) is then removed from the anatomy, and the IMU 1002 is removed from the alignment holster in preparation for attachment of the working IMU 1002 to other surgical tools.

[0184] As an example, an IMU 1002 previously attached to a scapular alignment tool is removed from the tool and attached to a surgical tool in a known position. In an exemplary configuration, the IMU 1002 (previously attached to the scapular alignment tool) is rigidly fixed to a cup reamer whose orientation relative to the drilling direction is known, such that the orientation of the cup reamer relative to the scapula is known and dynamically updated by both IMUs (the cup reamer attached IMU 1002 and the pelvis attached IMU 1002).

[0185] The software program provides a graphical user interface for the surgeon that displays a virtual model of the patient's scapula and a virtual model of the surgical instrument in question (in this case a cup reamer) (the virtual model of the patient's scapula has already been completed through a virtual templating step, and the virtual model of the surgical instrument, such as a cup reamer, has previously been loaded into the system for the particular surgical instrument, such as an available cup reamer), and updates the orientation of the scapula and surgical instrument in real time with the graphical user interface providing position and orientation information to the surgeon. Rather than using a graphical user interface, the system may include a surgical instrument with indicator lights that show the surgeon whether the reamer is correctly oriented and, if not, the direction in which the reamer needs to be repositioned to correctly orient it in alignment with the preoperative plan. After completion of the surface replacement using the cup reamer, the practical IMU 1002 is removed from the cup reamer and rigidly fixed to the drill plate, whose orientation and position are known. The drill plate is then utilized to drill the scapula while the IMU continues to provide acceleration feedback that is utilized by the software to perform position calculations to provide real-time feedback on the position of the scapula relative to the drill plate and subsequently position the glenoid base plate and attach the glenoid component ball. While not required, the utility IMU 1002 may be rigidly fixed to the surgical drill to ensure proper orientation of the drill relative to the drill plate when drilling through the drill plate. Similar alignment tools and IMU collections may also be utilized in conjunction with the software system to assist in the placement of the humeral stem component.

[0186] In an exemplary embodiment, the humerus alignment tool comprises an elongate shaft having a distal shape shaped to fit partially against the patient's humeral neck in only a single orientation (including rotational and angular positions). The alignment tool includes an IMU 1002 alignment holster at its proximal end for receiving the IMU 1002 such that the IMU 1002 is rigidly fixed relative to the alignment tool and the distal shape when the IMU 1002 is locked in the holster. A second reference IMU 1002 is rigidly fixed relative to the humerus in a known position in agreement with the alignment tool. When the alignment tool is correctly oriented relative to the humeral neck (and the IMU 1002 locked in the alignment holster and the reference IMU 1002 attached to the humerus are activated), the orientation of the IMU 1002 locked in the alignment holster relative to the humeral orientation (set when the distal shape is received on the humeral neck in only the single correct orientation) is known. The operator indicates to the software system that the IMUs are resting in the correct position, and the software records the position of each IMU, "zeroing" the practical IMU. Then, after the alignment tool (with the IMU 1002 locked in the holster) is removed from the anatomy, the practical IMU 1002 is removed from the alignment holster, preparing the IMU 1002 for attachment to other surgical tools.

[0187] As an example, the IMU 1002 previously attached to a humerus alignment tool is removed from the tool and attached to another surgical tool in a known position. In an exemplary embodiment, the IMU 1002 (previously attached to the humerus alignment tool) is rigidly fixed to the humerus resection block in a known position such that motion of the IMU 1002 is correspondingly translated into known motion of the resection block. Assuming the reference IMU 1002 is rigidly attached to the humerus in a known position, the IMUs cooperate to provide dynamic updates to the software system regarding the changing positions of both the humerus and the resection block (via acceleration data).

[0188] The software program provides a graphical user interface for the surgeon to display a virtual model of the patient's humerus and a virtual model of the surgical instrument in question (in this case a humerus resection block) (the virtual model of the patient's humerus has already been completed through a virtual templating step, and the virtual model of the surgical instrument, such as a resection block, has been previously loaded into the system for the particular surgical instrument, such as an available resection block), and updates the orientation of the humerus and the surgical instrument in real time with the graphical user interface providing position and orientation information to the surgeon. Rather than using a graphical user interface, the system may include a surgical instrument with indicator lights that indicate to the surgeon whether the resection block is correctly oriented and, if not, the direction in which the resection block needs to be repositioned to correctly orient the resection block in alignment with the preoperative plan and perform the correct osteotomy. Additionally or alternatively, the practical IMU 1002 may be attached to a drill plate that is used to drill one or more holes for insertion of respective fiducial pins. In such a case, the resection block does not necessarily need to have an IMU associated with it, provided that the surgical block is properly positioned and oriented using the one or more fiducial pins. In any event, after the necessary osteotomies are made, the operational IMU 1002 is removed from the surgical instrument, rigidly fixed to the reamer (to properly drill the humeral canal), and then attached to the humeral stem inserter with a known orientation relative to the inserter. The stem inserter is then used to place the humeral stem implant into the drill canal while the IMU continues to provide acceleration feedback that is used by software to calculate the position of the humerus and stem inserter in real time and display this position data to the surgeon via a graphical user interface.

[0189] In addition to component placement, IMUs attached to the pelvis and femur can be used to test for potential component collisions, allowing component rotation to be tracked to prevent post-operative complications and improve overall patient satisfaction.

[0190] In accordance with the above disclosure regarding the use of the IMU 1002, the following is an exemplary description of the mathematical models and algorithms used to generate three-dimensional position data from the gyroscopes, accelerometers, and magnetometers of each IMU. In an exemplary embodiment, each IMU processor is programmed to calculate the change in position of the IMU 1002 based on inputs from the gyroscopes, accelerometers, and magnetometers of the IMU by utilizing a sequential Monte Carlo method (SMC) with a von Mises-Fisher density algorithm. The IMU data stream consists of one set of gyro data (G1) for three axes, X, Y, and Z, three sets of accelerometer data (A1-A3) for three axes, X, Y, and Z, and three sets of magnetometer data (M1-M3) for three axes, X, Y, and Z. Orientation tracking of the IMU 1002 may be achieved with one set of data from each sensor (i.e., G1, A1, M1).

[0191] Using G1, A1, and M1 as an example, assuming all the raw sensor data has been converted and processed, At time and state = 1, 1) The algorithm first generates a set of N particles around a neutral position with a given variance coefficient of the von Mises-Fisher density, as represented in Algorithm 1 specified below. Each particle represents a 4-tuple shaped orientation around the X, Y and Z axes. In other words, the particles contain a set of independent and uniformly distributed random variables drawn from the same probability density space. In orientation tracking applications, the particles are statistically constrained variations of the observed orientations. However, it should be noted that the exact statistics (variance coefficients) do not need to be "known", as the algorithm optimizes the performance as more samples are collected. It is preferable to use a higher diversity as an initial guess and allow the algorithm to improve.

[0192]

number

[0193] After receiving the first data set from G1, A1, and M1, we calculate an estimate of the current orientation of the IMU. This is achieved by first knowing the tilt measured from A1. The tilt information is needed to mathematically correct (de-rotate) the magnetometer measurements as shown as steps 2 and 3 of Algorithm 2 specified below. Then, by using the A1 and M1 data, we estimate the initial orientation of the IMU by Algorithm 2, which is based on a Gauss-Newton optimization method. The goal of Algorithm 2 is to find the orientation (q) such that the slope and heading components of the estimate are the same as the measurements from A1 and M1 within a tolerable error. obv ) iteratively. Note that while Algorithm 2 requires input from past states, any input will suffice since there are no past states at time=1. The reason why accelerometers and magnetometers cannot be used alone to track orientation is the limitation of the accelerometers' tilt measurement. As an example, for some specific orientations, the IMU may have the same tilt output for different orientations due to the nature of trigonometric quadrants. For this reason, the gyroscope needs to record the quadrant in which the IMU is located.

[0194]

number

[0195] Next, we calculate the number of particles (q vMF ) are "rotated" so that their average is centered on the orientation estimates from A1 and M1.

[0196]

number

[0197] Then, all particles are pre-estimated based on G1 by the following formula:

[0198]

number

[0199] The orientation expectation value of the current state is calculated by the particle estimate (q est,i This is achieved by averaging the quadruples (t+1, t+2, t+3, t+4) over the set of particles. Since the quadruples are four-dimensional vectors, the averaging is done differently. In Algorithm 3, we iteratively interpolate between two quadruples from the particle ensemble until only one remains.

[0200]

number

[0201] At time and state=2, a second data set is received. Using the same method described in paragraph 0193 (algorithm 2), the latest orientation estimate is calculated and then compared with all particle estimates from previous states (q est,i (t-1)). The error / residual between each particle and the current orientation estimate is used to weight the accuracy of the particle (i.e. particles closer to the estimate receive higher weights than particles further away) according to the following formula:

[0202]

number

[0203] Next, the quality of the particles is evaluated to filter out and resample particles with very low weights. This can be done using deterministic, residual, or auxiliary resampling schemes. Since the algorithm prefers particles close to the observations, the particle set will start to lose diversity over time. The particles will become highly concentrated and no longer have statistical significance. The replacement of a small portion of the particles will then increase the diversity. This is done by first evaluating the current dispersion coefficient of the particles. If the dispersion coefficient indicates high concentration, some of the current particles are replaced by the generation of a new particle set at a neutral position based on the given dispersion coefficient. The new particles are rotated from the neutral position to the current orientation expectation. This is summarized in the following equation:

[0204]

number

[0205] Finally, based on the new data from G1, the particles are estimated ahead and the current orientation state is calculated again. The above process and algorithm is reused for each new data received from G1, A1, and M1.

[0206] Creating a trauma plate 112-125, an exemplary process and system for creating bone plates (i.e., trauma plates) in a given population is described. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that bones can be repaired by regeneration after fracture. Prior art trauma plates have been utilized depending on the severity and location of the fracture, but often require bending or other modification in the operating room to accommodate the irregular bone shape and to achieve maximum contact between the bone fragments. However, excessive bending can shorten the useful life of the trauma plate and lead to bone plate failure and / or loosening of the trauma plate screws. The present process and system provide a more precise trauma plate shape, thereby reducing or eliminating the need for intraoperative plate shaping, thereby increasing the useful life of the plate and increasing the time before the trauma plate screws loosen.

[0207] The above exemplary description for creating a trauma plate may be applied to any and all bones for which a trauma plate is applicable. For purposes of simplicity, the exemplary description describes a system and process for creating a trauma plate for use with the humerus. However, it is understood that the process and system are equally applicable to the manufacture of other bones of the body and corresponding trauma plates, and are not limited to humerus trauma plates.

[0208] As part of the exemplary process and system for creating trauma plates, a statistical bone atlas of the bone in question is created and / or utilized. By way of illustration, the bone in question includes the humerus. Those skilled in the art are familiar with statistical atlases and how to configure them in the context of one or more bones. As a result, a detailed description of the configuration of a statistical bone atlas is omitted for the sake of brevity. Nevertheless, what may be unique about the statistical bone atlas of the exemplary system and process is the classification of the humerus in the statistical bone atlas based on gender, age, ethnicity, deformity, and / or partial configuration. In this manner, one or more trauma plates may be mass-customized to one or more of the above classifications, which define a particular bone population.

[0209] In an exemplary embodiment, a statistical bone atlas includes anatomical data that may take a variety of forms. By way of example, a statistical bone atlas may include two-dimensional or three-dimensional images, as well as information regarding bone parameters from which measurements can be obtained. Exemplary atlas input data may be in the form of x-ray images, CT scan images, MRI images, laser scan images, ultrasound images, segmented bones, physical measurement data, and any other information from which a bone model can be created. Software accessing the statistical atlas data utilizes this input data to build a three-dimensional bone model (or by accessing a three-dimensional bone model already created and stored as part of the statistical atlas), and the software operates to create a three-dimensional average or template bone model.

[0210] Using the template bone model, the software allows for automatic or manual specification of points on the exterior surface of the template bone model. By way of illustration, in the context of an average humerus model, a user of the software defines the approximate boundary shape of the final trauma plate by roughly outlining the shape of the trauma plate on the exterior surface of the humerus model. The approximate boundary shape of the trauma plate can also be obtained by the user specifying a series of points on the exterior surface of the humerus model that correspond to the outer boundary. Once the outer boundary or boundary points are defined, the software allows for automatic or manual specification of points on the exterior surface of the humerus model within the defined boundary. As an example, the software provides a partial filling operation that allows a user to specify a percentage of the trauma plate's boundary that is specified by a series of points that each correspond to a different location on the exterior of the humerus model. The software also provides a manual point specification feature that allows a user to specify one or more points on the exterior surface of the humerus model within the boundary. It should be noted that when using manual point specification, the user does not need to define a boundary as a prelude to specifying points on the exterior of the humerus model. Rather, once manual point specification is complete, the boundary is defined by the outermost points specified.

[0211] After designation of points on the external surface of the template bone model, the located points are propagated throughout the bone population of interest. In particular, the located points are automatically applied by the software to each 3D bone model in a given population by statistical atlas point correspondence. As an example, a given bone population may be gender and ethnicity specific and include the humeri of a white female. Using the propagated points of each bone model in the population, the software creates a 3D rendering of the trauma plate of each bone by filling gaps between points within the boundary using a 3D filling process. The software then calculates the longitudinal midline of the 3D rendering of each trauma plate by a thinning process.

[0212] The midline of each 3D trauma plate rendering includes a 3D midline with various curvatures along its length. The software extracts the 3D midline and uses least squares fitting to determine the preferred number of radii of curvature that collaboratively best approximate the principal curvature of the 3D midline. In the context of the humerus, three radii of curvature have been found to accurately approximate the midline curvature. However, this number may vary depending on the bone population and the boundaries of the trauma plate. Here, additional features may be included as well, such as cross-sectional curvature at one or more locations along the length of the plate, locations of muscles, nerves, and other soft tissues to avoid, or any other features relevant to defining the plate size or shape. As an example, the three radii of curvature of the midline represent the bend of the trauma plate at the proximal humerus, the transition between the humeral shaft and the humeral head, and the curvature of the humeral shaft. Each radius of curvature was recorded and the radii were clustered into groups that best fit the population by application of a 4D feature vector to the radius of curvature data. In an exemplary embodiment, the cluster data may indicate that multiple lesion plates are required for proper fitting to the population. Once the radius of curvature data has been clustered, the dimensions of the lesion plate may be determined.

[0213] Upon extraction of features relevant to plate design, the software determines the optimal number of clusters that fit the population. It should be noted that there are cases where there are more than one cluster that gives a local minimum, as outlined in FIG. 120. To determine the optimal selection that provides an acceptable error and a reasonable number of plates in each family, the software generates a 3D surface model for the plates in each cluster. It then performs an automatic evaluation by placing these plates in the population and calculating the misfit between the plate and the bone surface. The results of this analysis allow the software to choose the optimal number of plates to use for this particular population. The final plate model is then parameterized to place the screw locations on each plate in a way that maximizes fixation while avoiding muscle and soft tissue locations. The screw width is determined by cross-sectional analysis of the bone at each screw level across the population.

[0214] The process and method were validated for humeri through a cadaveric study. In particular, CT scans of the humeri of a white female cadaver were obtained. These CT scans were utilized by the software to generate separate 3D models of each humeri. It should be noted that neither the CT scans nor the 3D models utilized during this validation study were part of the statistical atlas and associated population utilized to generate the humerus trauma plates. As a result, neither the CT scans nor the 3D models contained new data and models used to validate the designed humerus trauma plates. After the generation of the 3D validation models, each of the models was classified into a specific cluster (a cluster resulting from the design of the humerus trauma plate from the design population). Based on the cluster into which the validation models were classified, the humerus trauma plate designed for that cluster was fitted to the appropriate validation 3D humerus model to calculate measurements indicating any spacing between the exterior surface of the validation 3D humerus model and the underside of the humerus trauma plate. FIG. 124 is a distance map of the trauma plate fitted to the validation 3D humerus model, showing the area of ​​maximum distance between the bone and the trauma plate. It can be seen that the majority of the trauma plate is at minimum distance from the bone, while the areas of low fit are only in the range of 0.06-0.09 cm apart. As a result, the conclusion of this cadaveric study was that the trauma plate designed using the exemplary process described above with the system described above has an exceptional contour fit that, when applied intraoperatively, can eliminate the need for the surgeon to bend or manually reshape the bone plate.

[0215] 131-138, in another exemplary instance of this process, a clavicle trauma plate was created. Here, a statistical atlas was created from many clavicles that adequately captured the variation within, for example, the Caucasian population. It is noted that the statistical atlas may include clavicles from many ethnicities, many patient ages, and various geographic regions. While this exemplary disclosure is unintentionally backgrounded to a Caucasian population dataset, one skilled in the art will understand that the above system and method is not limited to only a statistical atlas of the Caucasian population. FIG. 132 shows the overall clavicle anatomy.

[0216] In an exemplary form, the statistical atlas of the clavicle also defines the location of each clavicle with respect to muscle attachment sites, as shown in FIG. 134. Cross-sectional contours at 10% increments along the entire bone (see FIG. 138), as well as cross-sectional contours at muscle attachment sites and at the clavicle constriction (see FIG. 137) were extracted. Maximum and minimum dimensions of each cross-sectional contour were calculated. Asymmetries across the 3D surface were also examined by analyzing the magnitude and orientation differences between like points across the entire clavicle surface in the dataset. The results support existing research on clavicle asymmetry, namely that the left clavicle is longer than the right clavicle, but the right clavicle is thicker than the left clavicle. However, the pattern of asymmetry differs between men and women, as shown in FIG. 139.

[0217] Also, as shown in FIG. 133, the midline of the clavicle does not follow a symmetrical "S" shape as with existing clavicle trauma plate designs. This disclosure therefore supports the failure of today's clavicle trauma plates to mimic the anatomical curvature of the clavicle. With reference to FIG. 135 and FIG. 136, male clavicles are significantly asymmetric in muscle and ligament attachment contours in all dimensions (p<.05), whereas female asymmetry is more variable. However, the area without muscle attachments in the posterior midshaft was significantly asymmetric in both genders.

[0218] From the clavicle features extracted across the statistical atlas, clustering was performed (by the clustering method described above in this application, incorporated herein by reference) to determine different similar groups (i.e., populations) where each different group best fits the population with its association with a particular clavicle trauma plate. Also, for each trauma plate population, screw fixation points and lengths were determined to best avoid soft tissue (muscle attachments) and prevent additional fractures or plate loosening due to screws that are too long or too short. Using this process, multiple clavicle trauma plate families were designed to correspond to the mass-customized clavicle trauma plates, as shown in Figures 140-149.

[0219] Creation of patient-specific trauma plates 126 graphically depicts the patient-specific trauma process to include various components, such as pre-operative surgical planning, generation of a preformed patient-specific trauma plate, intraoperatively guided positioning and fixation of the patient-specific trauma plate, and optional post-operative evaluation of the patient-specific trauma plate. A more detailed description of these components and exemplary processes and structures associated with each component will be discussed in turn.

[0220] 126-130 illustrate an exemplary process flow of the pre-operative surgical planning component. An initial input of anatomical data is obtained for the anatomy of interest. For purposes of exemplary illustration only, the clavicle is described as the fractured or deformed anatomy, and the clavicle trauma plate is described as the patient-specific trauma plate. The anatomical data is input into a software package configured to select or create a patient-specific clavicle trauma plate, including two-dimensional (2D) images or three-dimensional (3D) surface representations of the clavicle, which may be in the form of a surface model or point cloud, for example. In situations where 2D images are used, the 2D images are utilized to construct a 3D virtual surface representation of the fractured clavicle. Those skilled in the art are familiar with utilizing 2D images of anatomy to construct a 3D surface representation. Thus, a detailed description of this process has been omitted for the sake of brevity. By way of example, the input anatomical data may include one or more of x-ray, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), or any other imaging data capable of generating a 3D surface representation of the tissue of interest. The output of this anatomical data input is a 3D virtual surface representation of the fractured clavicle components.

[0221] The 3D virtual surface representation of the fractured clavicle components is then evaluated to identify the location and shape of the fracture, or in the case of complete fracture and separation of the bone components, the relative location and shape of the bone components.

[0222] In the situation of complete fracture and separation of bone components, the process and associated software executes a fracture reduction process that allows construction of a patchwork clavicle by manual repositioning of the 3D virtual surface representation of the fractured clavicle. In such a situation, the user creates a 3D patchwork clavicle model resembling an assembled clavicle from components including the 3D virtual surface representation by repositioning and reorienting the 3D virtual surface representation of the fractured clavicle. Alternatively, the process and associated software may construct a patchwork clavicle model by automatic repositioning and reconstruction of the 3D virtual surface representation of the fractured clavicle, optionally by using a 3D template model of the clavicle. More specifically, for each fractured bone component (i.e., fracture edges) that includes a 3D virtual surface representation, the software first detects one or more fracture sites from the 3D virtual surface representation and extracts a contour from each fracture site. The software then compares the extracted contours to the contours of the 3D template clavicle model to pairwise match the contours and locate the matching bone components / fragments at each fracture site. These matched bone components / fragments are then grouped. After grouping the matched bone components / fragments, the software fits the grouped bone fragments to the 3D template clavicle model and identifies the correct positions of all the bone components / fragments with respect to the 3D template clavicle model. The matched bone components / fragments are then repositioned to construct a 3D patchwork clavicle model similar to the 3D template clavicle model, which is then used by the software to construct a 3D reconstructed clavicle model, as described below.

[0223] After reduction, referring again to FIG. 7 and FIG. 127, the 3D patchwork clavicle is used to identify the anatomical model (e.g., complete bone model) in the statistical atlas that is most similar to the 3D patchwork clavicle model of the patient in question. This step is illustrated in FIG. 3 as a search for the closest bone in the atlas. First, the 3D patchwork clavicle model is compared to the statistical atlas bone models using one or more similarity criteria to identify the statistical atlas bone model that is most similar to the 3D patchwork clavicle model. The result of this initial similarity criterion is the selection of a bone model from the statistical atlas to be used as an "initial guess" in the subsequent registration step. In the registration step, the 3D patchwork clavicle model is registered to the selected atlas bone model (i.e., the bone model of the initial guess) such that the output is a patient-specific reconstructed bone model aligned with the atlas bone model. Following the registration step, the shape parameters of the aligned "initial guess" are optimized so that its shape fits the 3D patchwork clavicle model.

[0224] Optimization of shape parameters (in this case from a statistical atlas) minimizes the error between the reconstructed patient-specific bone model and the 3D patchwork clavicle model by using regions of unfractured bone. By varying the values ​​of the shape parameters, different anatomical shapes can be represented. This process is repeated until convergence of the reconstructed shape (possibly measured as the relative surface change between iterations or the maximum number of allowed iterations) is achieved.

[0225] A relaxation step is performed to morph the optimized bone to best fit the 3D patchwork clavicle model. Consistent with this exemplary case, the missing anatomy from the 3D patchwork clavicle model output by the convergence step is applied to the morphed 3D clavicle model to create a patient-specific 3D model of the patient's reconstructed clavicle. More specifically, the surface points on the 3D patchwork clavicle model are relaxed (i.e., morphed) directly onto the patient-specific 3D clavicle model to best fit the reconstructed shape to the patient-specific shape. The output of this step is a fully reconstructed patient-specific 3D clavicle model that represents what should be the normal / complete anatomy of the patient's clavicle.

[0226] After total anatomy reconstruction, the system software begins a reduction sequence planning process, in which the software allows for manual or automatic determination of which clavicle components (i.e., fractured clavicle fragments) are to be reassembled and attached to one another and in what order. To this end, the software records in memory a 3D model of the progression of the clavicle assembly from the bone components. Thus, assuming the clavicle is fractured into six components, the software records a first 3D model showing the assembly of the first and second fracture components, followed by a second 3D model showing the assembly of the first, second, and third fracture components, and so on, until a final 3D model is reached that reflects the assembled position and orientation of all six fractured bone components, resembling a 3D patchwork clavicle model.

[0227] This reduction sequence decision allows the software to manually or automatically select from one of a plurality of clavicle trauma plate templates using the 3D patchwork clavicle. More specifically, the clavicle trauma plate templates include a set of 3D virtual surface depictions of clavicle trauma plates that have been generally shaped to match size and shape parameters associated with a given population obtained from a statistical bone atlas. In other words, the statistical bone atlas includes a surface model of a plurality of normal, fully anatomic clavicles that have been classified based on one or more of size, ethnicity, age, sex, and any other markers indicative of bone shape. An exemplary description of the procedure for arriving at the template bone plate is provided above with respect to Figures 112-125, which are incorporated herein by reference. In the automatic selection mode, the software compares the dimensions and contours of the plurality of clavicle trauma plate templates to the 3D patchwork clavicle to identify the template that best fits the 3D patchwork clavicle (i.e., similarity of contour and shape with respect to bone anatomy).

[0228] Using a clavicle trauma plate template that best fits the 3D patchwork clavicle, the software allows manual or automatic identification of fixation site locations through the trauma plate, as well as the orientation and length of fixation devices (e.g., surgical screws) to be utilized. In the automatic fixation site identification mode, the software avoids placing any fixation holes in the path of nerve or muscle attachments by capturing muscle and attachment locations as well as nerve locations. The software also allows manual or automatic selection of fixation fasteners for use with the trauma plate. In this manner, the software may automatically select fasteners that take into account the size and shape of the fractured components of the clavicle, the location and orientation of the fastener holes that extend through the trauma plate, and the shape of the fasteners (e.g., screws) to improve fixation strength and avoid unnecessary compromise of clavicle integrity.

[0229] After selection of the clavicle trauma plate template, fixation hole locations, and fixation fasteners, the software performs virtual bone plate placement, including positioning the clavicle trauma plate template on the 3D patchwork clavicle and manual or automatic deformation of the clavicle trauma plate template to create a patient-specific virtual 3D clavicle trauma plate having size, length, and contour dimensions by fitting the external surface contour of the 3D patchwork clavicle. The software records the patient-specific clavicle trauma plate dimensions and converts these virtual dimensions into machine code that enables the generation of a tangible patient-specific clavicle trauma plate capable of rapid manufacturing.

[0230] Using the patient-specific clavicle trauma plate dimensions, the software also receives anatomical data regarding the location and location of the patient's soft tissues, blood vessels, and nerves within the region of the fractured clavicle to construct an incision plan. The incision plan is pre-operative and proposes a surgical approach with one or more incisions that improve access to the fractured clavicle components while simultaneously reducing the invasiveness of the surgical procedure, potentially shortening recovery time and reducing post-operative collateral trauma. FIG. 134 shows a 3D patchwork clavicle with a surface colored to indicate muscle attachment locations to the patient's clavicle. As a result, the patterned circles extending longitudinally along the 3D patchwork clavicle correspond to the location of fixation fasteners oriented toward the locations of mostly no muscle attachments.

[0231] After construction of the incision plan, the surgeon reviews the incision plan and makes any modifications prior to approval of the plan. After approval, the incision plan may be exported to an intraoperative surgical guidance system. Similarly, the incision plan may be utilized to construct a tangible preoperative clavicle model that estimates the shape of the reconstructive clavicle components attached together to simulate the normal clavicle of the patient. This tangible clavicle model may then be used to test the fit of the clavicle trauma plate and to make any contour modifications by bending that the surgeon may preoperatively require. Alternatively, the tangible clavicle model may need to be loosely included with the clavicle components to allow the surgeon to attach one or more of the trauma plates and hold the clavicle components to allow in vitro testing of the fit of the trauma plate and any in vitro modifications of the trauma plate.

[0232] 128 and 129, an exemplary patient-specific clavicle trauma plate may be positioned intraoperatively under fluoroscopy. An exemplary technique is discussed below with respect to attachment of a patient-specific clavicle trauma plate to a patient's clavicle or clavicle component, however, it is understood that the exemplary process is equally applicable to attachment of a non-patient-specific trauma plate to a clavicle, or more generally, attachment of any trauma plate to any bone or fractured bone component.

[0233] FIG. 128 is a process flow illustrating various steps included as part of a trauma plate placement system for intraoperatively positioning a patient-specific trauma plate via fluoroscopy, including establishing patient alignment through the use of preliminary planning data in conjunction with the placement of fiducial markers. More specifically, the preliminary planning data is loaded into the trauma plate placement system software package and may include the patient's geometry, bone and tissue geometry, the location of each trauma plate, the type and location of fixation devices used to secure the trauma plate to the bone or bone component in question, and any other relevant information that affects the surgical location and technique. Fiducial markers used for fluoroscopy include, but are not limited to, optical IMUs, electromagnetic IMUs, etc. (although in the process flow of FIG. 128, optical markers are referenced and positioned at known locations relative to the patient's anatomical landmarks). Using the fiducial markers and the patient's known anatomical location and dimensions, the trauma plate placement system aligns the patient to the preoperative coordinate system. The fiducial markers are then tracked in space to provide feedback to the surgeon from the trauma plate placement system in alignment with the preoperative plan indicating the location of the incision or incisions relative to a fixed patient frame of reference. Exemplary feedback systems that may be utilized as part of the trauma plate placement system include, but are not limited to, a visual display that depicts the location and length of each incision by projection onto the surface of the patient.

[0234] In the context of a fractured clavicle, where the clavicle is comprised of separate bone components, the trauma plate placement system may also visually display identifying indicia on the multiple clavicle components to indicate the order of assembly of the bone components. In an exemplary form, the visual display includes a colored number displayed on each visible bone component. The colored number changes color depending on the orientation and position of the bone components relative to one another. In an exemplary form, the first bone component is identified by a display number "1" projected onto the exterior surface. This display number "1" may be red, yellow, or green depending on the bone orientation and position. A red number indicates incorrect orientation and position. Upon translation, the indicia changes to yellow if the surgeon has moved the bone component in the correct direction to achieve placement consistent with the preoperative plan. Upon continued translation, the number becomes green if the correct position has been achieved. This repositioning process is repeated for each clavicle component.

[0235] To provide this visual feedback to the surgeon regarding the position and orientation of the fractured bone components, the trauma plate placement system uses fluoroscopy to track the bone components in 3D space to identify whether the bone position and orientation are consistent with the preoperative plan. Prior to tracking, the bone components are registered using preoperative data to provide the surgeon with real-time updates regarding the correct position and orientation of the bone components via a projected display. As each bone fragment is tracked and finally attached to the clavicle trauma plate, the system uses fluoroscopic images to confirm the progression of the trauma plate placement, confirming the orientation and position of the plate, as well as the orientation and position of the fixation devices (e.g., screws) and the bone components. Finally, when the bone components are joined together via one or more clavicle trauma plates, the system displays a final indicia to the surgeon indicating that the procedure has met the objectives of the preoperative plan and can be completed.

[0236] Figure 130 is a process flow diagram illustrating the various steps included as part of a trauma plate placement system that uses ultrasound instead of fluoroscopy to intraoperatively position a patient-specific trauma plate. The above description of Figure 128 is comparable to the description of Figure 130, except that the system uses ultrasound instead of fluoroscopy to track the bony components, trauma plate, and fixation devices, and is incorporated herein by reference. As a result, redundant description has been omitted for the sake of brevity.

[0237] Creating a trauma plate placement guide With reference to FIG. 150, an exemplary process and system for creating a patient-specific trauma plate placement guide is described. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that fractures at one or more locations can result in bone fragments that are separated from one another. As part of a reconstructive surgery to repair the bone, one or more trauma plates are used to hold these fragments in a fixed orientation. In the reconstructive surgery, the bone is reassembled using original knowledge rather than the patient's specific anatomical facts. As a result, to the extent that the patient's bone anatomy has either changed from normal, the bone fragments have been significantly distorted, or there are a large number of bone fragments, surgeons will use prior art trauma plates and attempt to fit the bone fragments to the shape of the plate rather than fitting the shape of the plate to the bone fragments. The present process and system improve upon prior art trauma plate applications by creating trauma plate placement guides and customized trauma plates that fit the trauma plate to the bone to replicate the original bone shape and orientation.

[0238] An exemplary system flow begins with receiving input data representative of fractured anatomy. For purposes of illustration only, the fractured anatomy includes a human skull. It is noted that the above process and system is equally applicable to other anatomy / bones, such as, but not limited to, bones of the arms, legs, and torso. In an exemplary form, the anatomy data input may be in the form of x-rays, CT scans, MRIs, or any other imaging data that may represent the size and shape of bones.

[0239] The input anatomy data is used to construct a three-dimensional virtual model of the fractured anatomy. As an example, the input anatomy data includes a computed tomography scan of the fractured skull, which is processed by software to segment the scan and generate a three-dimensional model. Those skilled in the art are familiar with how to construct a three-dimensional virtual model using computed tomography. As a result, a detailed description of aspects of this process has been omitted for the sake of brevity.

[0240] Following generation of the 3D virtual model of the fractured skull, the software determines the areas in the 3D virtual model where the skull is fractured by comparing the 3D virtual model of the skull with data from the statistical atlas. In particular, the software uses features extracted from the surface model of the input anatomy (e.g., surface roughness, curvature, shape factor, bowing, neighbor connectivity) to extract fracture site areas. The software then extracts and integrally matches the outlines of these fracture sites to find matching feature sites. The software also matches the fracture fragments with the atlas to indicate optimal locations for locating the matching fracture sites to reconstruct normal anatomy.

[0241] After the software generates a reconstructed 3D virtual model of the fractured skull, buttresses may be manually and / or automatically positioned on the exterior of the reconstructed 3D virtual skull model. The automatic placement of buttresses is the result of programmed logic to maximize the stability of the bone fragments while minimizing the number of buttresses. As used herein, the term buttress (buttresses and its plurals) refers to any support used to stabilize the bone fragments relative to one another. In certain cases, when using the manual buttress placement feature, practical experience by a learned user, such as a surgeon, may complement or replace the logic. In any case, a series of buttresses are programmed into the software, which allows the software or the user of the software to select different buttresses for different applications. At the same time, the length of the buttresses may be manually or automatically manipulated based on the dimensions of the fracture and the bone fragments.

[0242] Following the allocation and placement of the buttresses on the reconstructed 3D virtual skull model, the software records the software's dimensions and the contours of each buttress. This record includes information necessary to manufacture each buttress, or at least information that would help a knowledgeable individual, such as a surgeon, to capture existing buttresses and fit each to the placement guide. In the context of molding the existing buttresses, the software generates computer-aided design (CAD) instructions for creating one or more physical models representative of the reconstructed 3D virtual skull model by extracting the contours of the reconstructed 3D virtual skull model. These CAD instructions are sent to a rapid prototyping machine that creates one or more physical models representative of the reconstructed 3D skull model. By recreating the appropriate anatomical surfaces as a physical model, each buttress can be applied and manually fitted to the physical model at the target location prior to implantation and fixation to the patient's skull.

[0243] Based on the location and length of any buttresses, the software also generates contour data for one or more patient-specific buttress placement guides by extracting the contours of the reconstructed 3D virtual skull model. In particular, a placement guide may be generated for each buttress. In this manner, the placement guide includes a surface contour that matches the contours of the patient's skull in a single orientation. Assuming that the location of the buttresses is known on the virtual model of the reconstructed skull, as well as the contours of the adjacent external skull surfaces, the software combines the two to create a patient-specific virtual placement guide. This virtual guide is output in the form of CAD instructions to a rapid prototyping machine for fabrication.

[0244] In this exemplary embodiment, the manufactured patient-specific placement guide comprises an elongated handle configured to be grasped by a surgeon. Extending from the end of the elongated handle is a block C-shaped contour plate. The underside of the contour plate is concave to match the convex shape of the skull where the buttress is to be positioned. Although not required, both ends (or other portions) of the contour plate may be secured to the buttress. Alternatively, the contour plate may simply provide a working window for aligning and ultimately securing the buttress to the skull. Once the buttress is attached to the skull, the contour plate may be removed.

[0245] Customized cutting and placement guides, plates Referring to FIG. 151, reconstruction of deformed, fractured, or incomplete anatomy is one of the complex problems facing health care providers. Abnormal anatomy may be the result of birth conditions, tumors, disease, or physical injury. As part of the treatment for various ailments, health care providers may find it advantageous to reconstruct or configure anatomy to facilitate treatment for a variety of conditions, such as, but not limited to, fractures / comminuted fractures, bone degeneration, orthopedic implant revisions, primary orthopedic implants, and disease.

[0246] The present disclosure provides a system and method for bone reconstruction and tissue reconstruction using bone grafts. To perform this reconstruction, the system and associated method utilizes images of the patient's current anatomy to construct two virtual 3D models: (a) a first 3D model representative of the current abnormal anatomy and (2) a second model representative of the patient's reconstructed anatomy. For a detailed description of using images of the patient (e.g., x-rays, CT scans, MRI images, etc.) to arrive at a virtual model of the patient's abnormal and reconstructed anatomy, see the "Total Anatomy Reconstruction" section above. The system and method utilizes the two 3D virtual models by constructing the system described in the "Total Anatomy Reconstruction" section in combination with the construction of a 3D virtual model of one or more bones (i.e., donor bones) from which the bone graft can be obtained. As described in more detail below, the 3D virtual model of the patient's reconstructed abnormal anatomy is analyzed to generate a 3D virtual model of the bone graft required for reconstruction. The 3D virtual graft model accesses one or more sites on the donor bone from which the bone graft can be harvested by comparison with the 3D virtual model of the donor bone. After the harvest site is determined, a cutting guide and a graft placement guide are designed and fabricated to collect the bone graft and attach it to the reconstruction site.

[0247] As an exemplary illustration, the system and method are described in the context of facial reconstruction, with the donor bone including the fibula. Those skilled in the art will recognize that the system and method may be applied to any reconstructive surgery utilizing one or more bone grafts. Furthermore, while facial reconstruction and the fibula as the bone donor are discussed, those skilled in the art will appreciate that the exemplary system and method may be used with donor bones other than the fibula.

[0248] As a preliminary step to discussing exemplary systems and methods for use in reconstructive surgical planning and surgery using bone grafts, it is assumed that imaging of the patient's abnormal anatomy and generating virtual 3D models of the patient's abnormal and reconstructed anatomy have been completed using the process described in the "Total Anatomy Reconstruction" section above. As a result, a detailed description of utilizing the patient's images to generate virtual 3D models of both the patient's abnormal and reconstructed anatomy has been omitted for the sake of brevity.

[0249] After completing the creation of the virtual 3D models of the patient's abnormal and reconstructed anatomy, the software compares the anatomy and highlights the regions that differ. In particular, the common regions between the virtual 3D models indicate bones that will be preserved, while the different regions indicate one or more sites to be reconstructed. The software extracts the non-common regions from the virtual 3D model of the patient's reconstructed anatomy and isolates these regions as separate 3D virtual models of the target bone graft. A pre-operative planner, such as a surgeon, reviews the virtual 3D bone graft models and makes a determination as to which bone or bones are deemed most suitable for harvesting the bone graft.

[0250] Regardless of the logic used to initially select potential bones as graft candidates, the bones in question are imaged using conventional methods (X-ray, CT, MRI, etc.). Each imaged bone is then segmented and a virtual 3D model of the imaged bone is created using the process described in the "Total Anatomical Reconstruction" section above. This 3D donor bone model is compared to the virtual 3D bone graft model to isolate areas of commonality. In particular, the software compares the surface contour of the 3D donor bone model to the surface contour of the virtual 3D bone graft model to identify areas of commonality or areas with similar curvature. Assuming there are no areas of commonality or similarity, the process can be restarted by analyzing another potential donor bone. In contrast, if one or more areas of commonality or similar curvature exist in the donor bone, these areas are highlighted on the 3D donor bone model. In particular, the highlighted areas mimic the shape of the virtual 3D bone graft model. If the common area is determined to be suitable for bone graft extraction, the software virtually extracts the bone graft as a virtual 3D model and applies the bone graft (having a specific / unique contour with respect to the donor bone) to the virtual 3D model of the patient's abnormal anatomy to identify any areas of the patient's abnormal anatomy that may need to be extracted as part of the potential fitting and reconstruction. In situations where application of the virtual 3D model of the extracted bone to the virtual 3D model of the patient's abnormal anatomy does not result in a satisfactory reconstruction, the process may be restarted at a bone selection point or may involve the extraction of a different bone area. However, assuming application of the virtual 3D model of the extracted bone to the virtual 3D model of the patient's abnormal anatomy results in a suitable fit, the system proceeds with designing a fixture to facilitate extraction of the bone graft and attachment of the bone graft to the patient's remaining bone.

[0251] In this exemplary embodiment, the system generates and outputs the necessary machine code for a rapid prototyping machine, CNC machine, or similar equipment to manufacture the bone graft cutting guides and bone graft placement guides. To generate the necessary output for manufacturing the bone graft cutting guides and bone graft placement guides, the system utilizes a virtual 3D model of the harvested bone applied to a virtual 3D model of the patient's abnormal anatomy.

[0252] In particular, the virtual 3D model of the harvested bone defines the boundaries of the virtual 3D cutting guide. Moreover, in this exemplary context, it is intended to harvest a portion of the fibula to provide a bone graft. The virtual 3D cutting guide includes a window across which a cutting instrument (saw, cutting drill, etc.) creates an appropriately outlined bone graft so that the appropriate portion of the fibula is harvested. The virtual 3D cutting guide not only needs to be shaped to create the appropriate bone graft contour, but also needs to be shaped to specify the placement of the cutting guide on the patient's donor bone. More specifically, the placement of the cutting guide on the donor bone needs to ensure that the harvested bone includes the correct contour shape and exhibits the correct contour. Thus, the underside of the virtual 3D cutting guide is designed to be a "negative" of the surface of the donor bone to which the cutting guide is attached. Exemplary attachment techniques for securing the cutting guide to the donor bone include, but are not limited to, screws, dowels, and pins. To accommodate one or more of these attachment techniques, the virtual 3D cutting guide is designed to include one or more through orifices, exclusive of the window traversed by the surgical cutter. After completion of the design of the virtual 3D cutting guide, the system generates and outputs the necessary machine code for a rapid prototyping machine, CNC machine, or similar equipment to manufacture the bone graft cutting guide, and then manufactures the actual cutting guide.

[0253] In addition to the cutting guide, the software also designs one or more bone graft placement guides. The bone graft placement guides are patient-specific and match the patient's anatomy (both the donor bone and the residual bone to which the donor bone is attached) to ensure proper placement of the bone graft relative to the residual bone. In an exemplary embodiment, the bone graft placement guide is configured for mandibular reconstruction. To design the bone graft placement guide, the software constructs a hybrid model using a virtual 3D model of the harvested bone applied to a virtual 3D model of the patient's abnormal anatomy. This hybrid model is used to identify joints where the bone graft will match (and preferably join by bone ingrowth) to the adjacent residual bone. At these joints, depending on various factors such as surgeon's preferences, the system identifies bone graft placement sites and, for each plate, one or more guides to facilitate proper placement and fixation of the plate relative to the bone graft and residual bone.

[0254] Customized trauma plate templates and placement guides FIG. 152 graphically illustrates an exemplary system and method for trauma plate templating in the form of a flow diagram. The system and method, which includes a computer and associated software, performs calculations to determine an optimal fit among a group of template trauma plates to mitigate future shape changes that may be required to fit the trauma plate to the patient's bone shape. In an exemplary form, the system constructs a 3D model of the patient's fractured bone as a bone and then creates a template trauma plate that fits the 3D model to define the shape of the trauma plate prior to implantation. In this way, the final trauma plate shape is patient-specific, allowing for a closer fit to the patient's anatomy, eliminating ambiguity of trauma plate placement and reducing surgery time. The system is easily deployable in a day-to-day clinical environment or in a surgeon's office.

[0255] Referring again to FIG. 152, the initial input of the system is any number of medical images showing a fractured bone. By way of example, these medical images may be one or more of X-ray, ultrasound, CT, and MRI. The images of the fractured bone are analyzed by a human operator to select the fractured bone among a number of possible programmed bones. Upon bone selection, the software utilizes the medical image data to form a 3D model of the fractured bone components (as described above with respect to FIG. 127 and its related description, which are incorporated herein by reference). These 3D bone models are then reduced (i.e., reassembled to form a patchwork of bones that orient and position the 3D bone models as if they were part of one unfractured bone) to form a 3D patchwork bone model using bone data from the statistical atlas. Similarly, in combination with the 3D patchwork bone model, bone data from the statistical atlas is also used to generate a complete 3D bone model (unfractured) of the patient's bone in question by morphing the 3D patchwork bone model onto the complete, unfractured bone model (referred to as the reconstructed bone model).

[0256] The software analyzes the reconstructed bone model to extract longitudinal curves along the dominant dimensions (e.g., midline curves), while also extracting cross-sectional curves perpendicular to the dominant dimensions, to extract design parameters for the trauma plate. From these design parameters, the software calculates a number of template trauma plates that are most similar to the design parameters. These design parameters include the trauma plate length, the trauma plate's longitudinal curvature, the lateral curvature perpendicular to the longitudinal curvature, the lateral length, and fixation points for the bone fasteners that ensure proper attachment and retention of the trauma plate to the fractured bone while minimizing interference with muscle attachment sites and nerve locations.

[0257] The reconstructed bone model is also utilized to generate a tangible 3D bone model. In an exemplary embodiment, the software is programmed to output the virtual reconstructed bone model as machine code to enable rapid prototyping of the 3D bone model in an additive or subtractive process. For purposes of this disclosure, an additive process includes 3D printing, where a model is created from a blank canvas by adding material to form discrete layers or slices of the bone model that, when stacked by printing successive layers, constitute the final bone model. In contrast, a subtractive process starts with a solid block of material and mechanically removes material using machine code (e.g., CNC code) to arrive at a solid bone model. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that any number of processes may be utilized to manufacture a tangible bone model. Depending on the process selected, the software is programmed to convert the 3D virtual model into machine code to facilitate rapid prototyping and construction of the 3D bone model.

[0258] After construction of the 3D bone model, a template trauma plate may be constructed, machined, and selected based on the software's selection of the shaped trauma plate to best fit the patient's fractured bone. Once thereafter, the trauma plate is fitted to the 3D bone model by fitting the template trauma plate to the 3D bone model and further refined by manual bending. After a satisfactory fit of the trauma plate to the bone model, the trauma plate is considered patient-specific and, after sterilization, is ready for implantation into the patient.

[0259] Patient-specific hip cage templating and placement guide FIG. 153 graphically illustrates an exemplary system and method for hip cage templating and placement guidance in the form of a flow diagram. The system and method includes a computer and associated software that performs calculations to determine the best fit among a group of template hip cages to mitigate future shape changes that may be required to fit the hip cage to the patient's bone shape. In an exemplary form, the system constructs a 3D model of the patient's hip joint (as a single bone in case of fracture or degeneration) and then creates a template hip cage that fits the 3D model to define the shape of the hip cage before implantation. In this way, the final hip cage shape and attachment site are patient-specific, allowing for a closer fit to the patient's anatomy, eliminating ambiguity of hip cage placement and reducing surgery time. The system is easily deployable in a day-to-day clinical environment or in a surgeon's office.

[0260] Referring again to FIG. 153, the initial input for the system is any number of medical images showing the patient's hip joint (all or part of the pelvis). By way of example, these medical images may be one or more of an x-ray, ultrasound, CT, and MRI. The software utilizes the images of the hip bone to construct a 3D virtual bone model of the patient's hip joint (as described above with respect to FIG. 1, FIG. 7, and related descriptions, which are incorporated herein by reference). The software then automatically labels this 3D bone model.

[0261] The software uses input from the statistical atlas (e.g., regions likely to contain particular landmarks) and local geometric analysis to calculate anatomical landmarks on the 3D bone model by comparison with the hip bone model in the statistical atlas. This calculation is specific to each landmark. For example, the approximate shape of the region is known, and the location of the landmark being searched for is known relative to the local shape characteristics. For example, locating the upper edge of the anterior lip point of the acetabulum is achieved by refining the search based on the approximate location of the upper edge of the anterior lip point in the statistical atlas. This process is repeated for each landmark of interest.

[0262] After automatic calculation of the anatomical landmarks for the 3D bone model, the software analyzes the bone model to calculate which of a number of template hip cages best fits the anatomical landmarks. In addition to calculating which of a number of hip cages best fits the anatomical landmarks of the patient's hip, the software also calculates where the cage will be attached to the patient's anatomy. Referring again to Figures 20 and 21, the relevant descriptions of which are incorporated herein by reference, the software is operative to determine where the cage will be attached to the patient's anatomy as well as to generate a virtual 3D guide that can be used to output sufficient machine code to construct a tangible 3D placement guide for the revision cage.

[0263] A bone model of the patient's hip joint is also utilized to generate a tangible 3D bone model. In an exemplary embodiment, the software is programmed to output the virtual 3D bone model as machine code to enable rapid prototyping of the tangible 3D bone model in an additive or subtractive process. For purposes of this disclosure, an additive process includes 3D printing, where a model is created from a blank canvas by adding material to form discrete layers or slices of the bone model that, when stacked by printing successive layers, constitute the final bone model. In contrast, a subtractive process starts with a solid block of material and mechanically removes material using machine code (e.g., CNC code) to arrive at a solid bone model. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that any number of processes may be utilized to manufacture a tangible bone model. Depending on the process selected, the software is programmed to convert the 3D virtual model into machine code to facilitate rapid prototyping and construction of the 3D bone model.

[0264] After construction of the 3D bone model, a template cage may be constructed, machined, and selected based on the software's selection of the cage shaped to best fit the patient's hip joint. Once there, the template cage is fitted to the 3D bone model and further refined by manual bending to fit the cage to the 3D bone model. After a satisfactory fit between the cage and the bone model, the cage is considered patient-specific and, after sterilization, is ready for implantation into the patient.

[0265] IMU Motion Tracking FIG. 154 shows an overview of an exemplary system and process for tracking bone and soft tissue motion using an IMU utilizing a computer and associated software. For example, this motion tracking can provide useful information about a patient's kinematics for use in pre-operative surgical planning. As an exemplary illustration, the system and method are described in the context of tracking bone motion and obtaining the resulting soft tissue motion with a 3D virtual model that integrates bone and soft tissue. Those skilled in the art will recognize that the system and method can be applied to any bone, soft tissue, or motion tracking endeavor. Furthermore, while bone and soft tissue motion tracking is discussed in the context of the knee joint or spine, those skilled in the art will appreciate that the exemplary system and method can be applied to joints other than the knee and bones other than vertebrae.

[0266] As a prelude to discussing exemplary systems and methods for use in bone and soft tissue motion tracking, it is assumed that imaging (including but not limited to x-ray, CT, MRI, and ultrasound) of the patient's (tracked) anatomy has been completed and a virtual 3D model of the patient's anatomy has been generated in software by the process described in the "Total Anatomy Reconstruction" section above, which is incorporated herein by reference. As a result, a detailed description of utilizing the patient's images to generate a virtual 3D model of the patient's anatomy has been omitted for the sake of brevity.

[0267] Soft tissue (e.g., ligaments, tendons, etc.) images, if available based on the imaging methods, are also included and segmented by the software to form a virtual 3D model of the patient's anatomy by segmenting the bones. If soft tissue images from the imaging methods are not available, the 3D virtual model of the bones is passed to the patient-specific soft tissue addition process. In particular, a statistical atlas may be used to estimate the location of the soft tissue relative to each bone shape of the 3D bone model.

[0268] The 3D bone models (whether or not soft tissue is part of the model) are subjected to a software-implemented auto-labeling process. As described herein above, the auto-labeling process uses input from the statistical atlas (e.g., regions likely to contain particular landmarks) and local geometric analysis to calculate anatomical landmarks for each anatomy instance in the statistical atlas. In instances where soft tissue is missing from the 3D bone model, the software-calculated anatomical landmarks for the 3D bone model are used to provide the most likely location of the soft tissue as well as the most likely dimensions of the soft tissue, both of which are incorporated into the 3D bone model to create a pseudo-patient-specific 3D bone and soft tissue model. In all instances, the anatomical landmarks and the 3D bone and soft tissue model can be viewed and manipulated using a user interface (i.e., software interface) of the software.

[0269] The software interface is communicatively coupled to a visual display that provides a user with information regarding the relative dynamic positions of the patient's bones and soft tissues, including the virtual bone and soft tissue model. To provide this dynamic visual information, which is updated in real time upon repositioning of the patient's bones and soft tissues, the software interface is also communicatively coupled to any number of IMUs 1002. These IMUs are rigidly fixed to one or more bones corresponding to the bones of the virtual 3D model and track the relative rotation of the bones. As an example, the bones may include the tibia and femur in the context of a knee joint, or one or more vertebrae (e.g., L1 and L5 vertebrae) in the context of a spinal cord. To track bone movement, additional tracking sensors (such as ultra-high bandwidth) are associated with each IMU (or combined as part of a single device) to align each IMU with the corresponding bone to which it is attached. Thus, by dynamically tracking the tracking sensors in 3D space and knowing their position relative to the IMU and the position of each IMU attached to the corresponding bone, the system can first correlate the dynamic movement of the tracking sensors to the dynamic position of the bone in question. To obtain meaningful data from the IMU, the patient's bones need to be aligned with respect to the virtual 3D bone and soft tissue model. To achieve this, the patient's joints or bones are held stationary at predetermined positions corresponding to the positions of the virtual 3D bone models. For example, the patient's femur and tibia may be straight so that the lower leg is aligned with the upper leg, while the 3D virtual bone model embodies a position in which the femur and tibia are longitudinally aligned. Similarly, the patient's femur and tibia may be oriented perpendicular to each other and held in this position, while the 3D virtual bone and soft tissue model is oriented so that the femur and tibia are perpendicular to each other. The UWB tracking sensors are used to align the relative positions of the bones to the virtual 3D bone and soft tissue model, similar to the IMU. It is noted that in accordance with the above disclosure, the IMU is calibrated prior to alignment using the exemplary calibration tool 1000 disclosed herein.

[0270] For example, in the context of a knee joint where the 3D virtual bone-soft tissue model includes the femur, tibia, and associated soft tissues of the knee joint, the 3D virtual model may have a position where the femur and tibia extend along a common axis (i.e., a common axis pose). To align the patient to this common axis pose, the patient wears the IMU and tracking sensors (rigidly fixed to the tibia and femur) and assumes a straight leg position where the femur and tibia are aligned along the common axis. This position is then held until the software interface confirms that the IMU and sensor positions are relatively unchanged and the user of the software interface indicates that the aligned pose has been adopted. This process may be repeated for other poses to align the 3D virtual model with respect to the IMU and tracking sensors. One skilled in the art will appreciate that the accuracy of the alignment generally increases with the number of alignment poses.

[0271] 175 and 176, in the context of a spinal cord where the 3D virtual model includes certain vertebrae of the spinal cord, the 3D virtual model may have a position where the vertebrae extend along a common axis (i.e., common axis posture) for a patient lying on a table or standing upright. To align the patient to this common axis posture, the patient wears the IMU 1002 and other tracking sensors rigidly fixed in place relative to the L1 and L5 vertebrae as shown in FIG. 175 and assumes a neutral upright spinal position that correlates with the neutral upright spinal position of the 3D virtual model. This position is then held until the software interface confirms that the positions of the IMU and tracking sensors are relatively unchanged and the user of the software interface indicates that the alignment posture has been taken. This process may be repeated for other postures to align the 3D virtual model with the IMU and tracking sensors. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the accuracy of the alignment generally increases with the number of alignment postures.

[0272] After alignment, the patient's anatomy may be moved in 3D space and dynamically tracked using the IMUs and tracking sensors such that bone and soft tissue movement is graphically displayed on the visual display by the movement of the 3D virtual model (see FIG. 176 in the spinal cord background). As the patient moves, the software reads and processes the output from the IMUs and / or tracking sensors to convert the output into dynamic graphical changes of the 3D model shown on the visual display (e.g., recording ligament lengths, joint postures, and joint surface contact areas). As shown in FIG. 177, when two or more IMUs are utilized to track the patient's anatomy (e.g., bones), the software interface determines the relative orientation of the first IMU with respect to the second IMU as described herein above, since each IMU processor is programmed to calculate the change in position of the IMU 1002 based on inputs from the IMU's gyroscope, accelerometer, and magnetometer using sequential Monte Carlo (SMC) with the von Mises-Fisher density algorithm. The above disclosure regarding the SMC method is incorporated herein by reference.

[0273] The motion profiles of lumbar healthy and lumbar diseased patients are significantly different, with out-of-plane motions being greater in diseased patients. Specifically, health and disease can be differentiated using an IMU by having the patient perform three activities: Axial Rotation (AR), Lateral Bending (LB), and Flexion-Extension (FE). The coefficients for each of these prescribed motions are calculated as follows:

[0274]

number

[0275] 155 and 174 show exemplary visual displays (i.e., user interfaces) operatively coupled to a software interface. As shown in the exemplary form of FIG. 155, the distal femur is displayed in conjunction with the prox...

Claims

1. 1. A method for designing a patient-specific bone plate, comprising: obtaining a plurality of virtual 3D bone component part surface representations of a respective plurality of bone component parts of the bone; identifying a location and shape of each of a plurality of said virtual 3D bone component part surface representations; virtually repositioning one or more of said plurality of virtual 3D bone component part surface representations relative to one another to form a virtual 3D patchwork bone model; selecting a virtual 3D bone plate template from among a plurality of virtual 3D bone plate templates that best matches the virtual 3D patchwork bone model; virtually positioning the selected virtual 3D bone plate template on the virtual 3D patchwork bone model; creating a virtual 3D patient-specific bone plate by deforming the selected virtual 3D bone plate template to fit a surface contour of the virtual 3D patchwork bone model; 23. A method comprising:

2. 10. The method of claim 1, further comprising converting the virtual 3D patient-specific bone plate into machine code for manufacturing a material patient-specific bone plate corresponding to the virtual 3D patient-specific bone plate.

3. The method of claim 1 , further comprising manufacturing a physical patient-specific bone plate that corresponds to the virtual 3D patient-specific bone plate.

4. 2. The method of claim 1, wherein obtaining the virtual 3D bone component part surface representations of a respective one of the bone component parts of the bone comprises generating the virtual 3D bone component part surface representations from one or more of an X-ray, a computed tomography scan, and a magnetic resonance imaging scan.

5. virtually repositioning one or more of the plurality of virtual 3D bone component part surface representations to form the virtual 3D patchwork bone model, detecting one or more edges in one or more of the virtual 3D bone component part surface representations; extracting an edge contour from one or more of said edges; comparing said edge contour with a template contour of a virtual 3D template bone model; matching the edge contour with the template contour; 2. The method of claim 1, comprising:

6. matching one or more of the virtual 3D bone component part surface representations with the virtual 3D template bone model; automatically virtually repositioning one or more of the plurality of virtual 3D bone component part surface representations onto the virtual 3D patchwork bone model to resemble the virtual 3D template bone model; 6. The method of claim 5, further comprising:

7. 2. The method of claim 1, wherein selecting the virtual 3D bone plate template from among a plurality of the virtual 3D bone plate templates that best matches the virtual 3D patchwork bone model comprises comparing dimensions and contours of the plurality of the virtual 3D bone plate templates with the virtual 3D patchwork bone model.

8. 8. The method of claim 7, wherein the plurality of virtual 3D bone plate templates comprise virtual 3D surface representations of bone models globally shaped to conform to size and shape parameters associated with a given population taken from a statistical bone atlas comprising surface models of a plurality of normal whole anatomical bones.

9. 10. The method of claim 1, further comprising locating fixation sites.

10. 10. The method of claim 9, wherein locating the fixation sites comprises capturing at least one of muscles, attachment sites, and nerve sites.

11. 10. The method of claim 1, further comprising the step of automatically selecting a fastener.

12. 12. The method of claim 11, wherein automatically selecting the fastener comprises considering at least one of a size and a shape of the bone component part, a location and orientation of at least one fastener hole, and a geometry of at least one of the fasteners.

13. performing a full anatomical reconstruction and generating a virtual 3D patient-specific reconstructed bone model showing the normal or complete anatomy of said bone; forming an ordering process using the virtual 3D patient-specific reconstructed bone model, the ordering process establishing which of a plurality of the bone component parts are attached to each other and in what order; 2. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

14. performing said full anatomical reconstruction and generating a virtual 3D patient-specific reconstructed bone model showing the normal or complete anatomy of said bone, identifying a virtual anatomical model in a statistical atlas that is most similar to the virtual 3D patchwork bone model; registering the virtual 3D patchwork bone model to the virtual anatomical model; optimizing shape parameters of the virtual anatomical model, thereby fitting the shape of the virtual anatomical model to the virtual 3D patchwork bone model; morphing the virtual anatomical model to fit the virtual 3D patchwork bone model to generate a virtual 3D patient-specific reconstructed bone model representative of the normal or complete anatomy of the bone; 14. The method of claim 13, comprising:

15. 1. A method for planning a surgical procedure, comprising: The method of claim 1 ; a software program automatically generating an incision plan based on at least one of a location and a position of at least one of a soft tissue, a blood vessel, and a nerve, the soft tissue, the blood vessel, and the nerve being proximate to the bone; 23. A method comprising:

16. The method of claim 1 further comprising constructing a material model of the bone.

17. the bone is a clavicle, The method of claim 1 , wherein the bone plate is a clavicle plate.

18. 1. A method for designing a patient-specific bone plate, comprising: obtaining a plurality of virtual 3D bone component surface representations of a bone part; virtually repositioning one or more of said virtual 3D bone component surface representations relative to one another to form a virtual 3D patchwork bone model; selecting a virtual 3D bone plate template from among a plurality of virtual 3D bone plate templates that best matches the virtual 3D patchwork bone model; virtually positioning the selected virtual 3D bone plate template on the virtual 3D patchwork bone model; creating a virtual 3D patient-specific bone plate by deforming the selected virtual 3D bone plate template to fit a surface contour of the virtual 3D patchwork bone model; 23. A method comprising:

19. 20. The method of claim 18, further comprising converting the virtual 3D patient-specific bone plate into machine code for manufacturing a material patient-specific bone plate corresponding to the virtual 3D patient-specific bone plate.

20. The method of claim 18, further comprising manufacturing a physical patient-specific bone plate that corresponds to the virtual 3D patient-specific bone plate.

21. 20. The method of claim 18, wherein obtaining the plurality of virtual 3D bone component surface representations of the part of the bone comprises generating the plurality of virtual 3D bone component surface representations from one or more of an X-ray, a computed tomography scan, and a magnetic resonance imaging scan.

22. virtually repositioning one or more of the virtual 3D bone component surface representations to form the virtual 3D patchwork bone model; detecting one or more edges in one or more of the virtual 3D bone component surface representations; extracting an edge contour from one or more of said edges; comparing said edge contour with a template contour of a virtual 3D template bone model; matching the edge contour with the template contour; 20. The method of claim 18, comprising:

23. matching one or more of the virtual 3D bone component surface representations with the virtual 3D template bone model; automatically virtually repositioning one or more of the plurality of virtual 3D bone component surface representations onto the virtual 3D patchwork bone model to resemble the virtual 3D template bone model; 23. The method of claim 22 further comprising:

24. 20. The method of claim 18, wherein selecting the virtual 3D bone plate template from among a plurality of the virtual 3D bone plate templates that best matches the virtual 3D patchwork bone model comprises comparing dimensions and contours of the plurality of the virtual 3D bone plate templates to the virtual 3D patchwork bone model.

25. 25. The method of claim 24, wherein the plurality of virtual 3D bone plate templates comprise virtual 3D surface representations of bone models globally shaped to conform to size and shape parameters associated with a given population taken from a statistical bone atlas comprising surface models of a plurality of normal whole anatomical bones.

26. 20. The method of claim 18, further comprising locating fixation sites.

27. 27. The method of claim 26, wherein locating the fixation sites comprises capturing at least one of muscles, attachment sites, and nerve sites.

28. 20. The method of claim 18, further comprising automatically selecting a fastener.

29. 30. The method of claim 28, wherein automatically selecting the fastener comprises considering at least one of a size and a shape of the part, a location and orientation of at least one fastener hole, and a geometry of at least one of the fasteners.

30. performing a full anatomical reconstruction and generating a virtual 3D patient-specific reconstructed bone model showing the normal or complete anatomy of said bone; forming an ordering process using the virtual 3D patient-specific reconstructed bone model, the ordering process establishing which of a plurality of said parts are attached to each other and in what order; 20. The method of claim 18, further comprising:

31. performing said full anatomical reconstruction and generating a virtual 3D patient-specific reconstructed bone model showing the normal or complete anatomy of said bone, identifying a virtual anatomical model in a statistical atlas that is most similar to the virtual 3D patchwork bone model; registering the virtual 3D patchwork bone model to the virtual anatomical model; optimizing shape parameters of the virtual anatomical model, thereby fitting the shape of the virtual anatomical model to the virtual 3D patchwork bone model; morphing the virtual anatomical model to fit the virtual 3D patchwork bone model to generate a virtual 3D patient-specific reconstructed bone model representative of the normal or complete anatomy of the bone; 31. The method of claim 30, comprising:

32. performing said full anatomical reconstruction and generating a virtual 3D patient-specific reconstructed bone model showing the normal or complete anatomy of said bone, identifying a virtual anatomical model in a statistical atlas that is most similar to the virtual 3D patchwork bone model; registering the virtual 3D patchwork bone model to the virtual anatomical model; optimizing shape parameters of the virtual anatomical model, thereby fitting the shape of the virtual anatomical model to the virtual 3D patchwork bone model; morphing the virtual anatomical model to fit the virtual 3D patchwork bone model to generate a virtual 3D patient-specific reconstructed bone model representative of the normal or complete anatomy of the bone; 31. The method of claim 30, comprising:

33. 1. A method for planning a surgical procedure, comprising: A method according to claim 18; a software program automatically generating an incision plan based on at least one of a location and a position of at least one of a soft tissue, a blood vessel, and a nerve, the soft tissue, the blood vessel, and the nerve being proximate to the bone; 23. A method comprising:

34. The method of claim 18, further comprising constructing a material model of the bone.

35. the bone is a clavicle, 20. The method of claim 18, wherein the bone plate is a clavicle plate.

Images