This other clinical trial compares robot-assisted US scanning with handheld US scanning and ground-truth CT data of the lumbar spine in healthy, young volunteers. The main questions it aims to answer are: * Is a 3D reconstruction of a lumbar spine from robot-assisted US scanning equivalent to or better quality than a 3D reconstruction from handheld US scanning? * Can a machine learning algorithm automatically segment the bone anatomy from robot-assisted and handheld US scanning to generate 3D lumbar spine reconstructions? * Can pedicle screw trajectories be identified based on posterior vertebral landmarks of 3D reconstructions of lumbar spines from both robot-assisted and handheld US scanning? Participants will: * fill out a medical history questionnaire * get clinically examined * have an ultra-low-dose (ULD) CT Scan of the vertebra L1 to S1 * have a handheld US scan of the vertebra L1 to S1 * have a robot-assisted US Scan of the vertebra L1 to S1 * fill out a post-study questionnaire
See this in plain English?
AI-rewrites the medical criteria so a patient or caregiver can understand them. Always confirm with the trial site.
Target registration errors between US reconstructions and ground truth CT data
Timeframe: Up to 1 year
Pedicle screw placement - Trajectory errors in terms of position
Timeframe: Up to 1 year
Pedicle screw placement - Trajectory errors in terms of direction
Timeframe: Up to 1 year