La Trobe

File(s) stored somewhere else

Please note: Linked content is NOT stored on La Trobe and we can't guarantee its availability, quality, security or accept any liability.

Development and validation of statistical shape models of the primary functional bone segments of the foot

journal contribution
posted on 2020-12-18, 00:10 authored by TM Grant, LE Diamond, C Pizzolato, BA Killen, D Devaprakash, L Kelly, Jayishni MaharajJayishni Maharaj, DJ Saxby
Copyright 2020 Grant et al. Introduction: Musculoskeletal models are important tools for studying movement patterns, tissue loading, and neuromechanics. Personalising bone anatomy within models improves analysis accuracy. Few studies have focused on personalising foot bone anatomy, potentially incorrectly estimating the foot's contribution to locomotion. Statistical shape models have been created for a subset of foot-ankle bones, but have not been validated. This study aimed to develop and validate statistical shape models of the functional segments in the foot: first metatarsal, midfoot (second-to-fifth metatarsals, cuneiforms, cuboid, and navicular), calcaneus, and talus; then, to assess reconstruction accuracy of these shape models using sparse anatomical data. Methods: Magnetic resonance images of 24 individuals feet (age = 28 ± 6 years, 52% female, height = 1.73 ± 0.8 m, mass = 66.6 ± 13.8 kg) were manually segmented to generate three-dimensional point clouds. Point clouds were registered and analysed using principal component analysis. For each bone segment, a statistical shape model and principal components were created, describing population shape variation. Statistical shape models were validated by assessing reconstruction accuracy in a leave-one-out cross validation. Statistical shape models were created by excluding a participant's bone segment and used to reconstruct that same excluded bone using full segmentations and sparse anatomical data (i.e. three discrete points on each segment), for all combinations in the dataset. Tali were not reconstructed using sparse anatomical data due to a lack of externally accessible landmarks. Reconstruction accuracy was assessed using Jaccard index, root mean square error (mm), and Hausdorff distance (mm). Results: Reconstructions generated using full segmentations had mean Jaccard indices between 0.77 ± 0.04 and 0.89 ± 0.02, mean root mean square errors between 0.88 ± 0.19 and 1.17 ± 0.18 mm, and mean Hausdorff distances between 2.99 ± 0.98 mm and 6.63 ± 3.68 mm. Reconstructions generated using sparse anatomical data had mean Jaccard indices between 0.67 ± 0.06 and 0.83 ± 0.05, mean root mean square error between 1.21 ± 0.54 mm and 1.66 ± 0.41 mm, and mean Hausdorff distances between 3.21 ± 0.94 mm and 7.19 ± 3.54 mm. Jaccard index was higher (P < 0.01) and root mean square error was lower (P < 0.01) in reconstructions from full segmentations compared to sparse anatomical data. Hausdorff distance was lower (P < 0.01) for midfoot and calcaneus reconstructions using full segmentations compared to sparse anatomical data. Conclusion: For the first time, statistical shape models of the primary functional segments of the foot were developed and validated. Foot segments can be reconstructed with minimal error using full segmentations and sparse anatomical landmarks. In future, larger training datasets could increase statistical shape model robustness, extending use to paediatric or pathological populations.


This work was supported by the Australian Research Council (LP150100905). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.


Publication Date






Article Number



19p. (p. 1-19)


PeerJ, Ltd



Rights Statement

The Author reserves all moral rights over the deposited text and must be credited if any re-use occurs. Documents deposited in OPAL are the Open Access versions of outputs published elsewhere. Changes resulting from the publishing process may therefore not be reflected in this document. The final published version may be obtained via the publisher’s DOI. Please note that additional copyright and access restrictions may apply to the published version.