Recurring Meeting of Cleveland Clinic Core Team

Date: Nov 26, 2013

Time: 10:30 AM EST

Means: In person meeting

Attendees:

1. Ahmet Erdemir
2. Jason Halloran
3. Craig Bennetts
4. Snehal Chokhandre
5. Robb Colbrunn
6. Tara Bonner

Agenda:

1. Discuss tasks progress.
2. Discuss specimen transportation device design and options.
3. Compare quotes from other vendors and finalize tissue testing equipment purchase.
4. Decide tasks for the next meeting.
5. Other

Immediate action items:

• Robb

  • Add information regarding data files and data structures in joint specifications.

• Snehal

  • Add more 3D DESS images to the imaging specifications page and ask Shannon at UH to program the 2D MESE sequence off line before the next imaging test session.

  Jason and Snehal

  • Research and obtain different material information for markers. Decide delrin or phenolic use based on compatibility and reaction with bone cement, and phenolic artefacts.

  Jason

  • Arrange meeting with Dr. Winalski to discuss images obtained at the test session.

Notes:

1. Discuss task progress
   • Immediate action items were discussed.
     • Feature specification development is on going. CCF team summarized the needs and provided test problems.In situ strains feature development is in progress and the supplied test problem is being used. The connector feature need was summarised and test problem will be provided.
     • Craig updated the cloud computing prototype design and CCF and Stanford teams met and discussed the updates and expectations. The gateway design and implementation was discussed and will be worked on in the following months.
     • Snehal obtained quotes from 4 vendors for the tissue testing machine and did cost and feature comparison.
     • Robb has been communicating with the Biomomentum engineers and trying to reach an agreement for machine feature and budget needs.
   • Imaging specifications
     • Snehal updated sample images from the test session at UH in Nov 14th.
     • The t2 proton density sequence programmed by Chris to get better ligament images did not provide sufficient information.
     • Snehal will add more images for all the sequence types.

     • The second sequence was programmed to match the 3D DESS sequence from the study by Peterfy et al http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3048821/.

     • Cartilage and meniscus can be seen very clearly in these images and the team decided to use the current sequence setting for one of the final imaging sequences.
     • Snehal will add images from this dataset showing ligaments.
     • The original t1 set will also be used as one of the final sequences.
     • Field of view for DESS images was smaller than other sequences.
     • All the future imaging sequence reports will be created using the imaging sequence template in the OAI study (reporting all the sequence information necessary. e.g field of view, resolution etc).
     • t1 (good for ligaments) and 3D DESS (good for cartilage and meniscus) will be used as primary conditions and any other supporting sequences will be added as secondary conditions.
     • Imaging page will be updated accordingly.
     • An axial dataset will be needed additionally for ligaments.
     • The brass marker components and a piece of delrin were also imaged to check for image artefacts. The brass screws might be ok to use with other marker components made out of delrin/ any other plastic.
     • An estimate of artefact region needs to be made (also depends on protocol) based on the size of marker components.
     • For femur and tibia, similar marker sets will be made.
   • Joint testing specifications
     • Robb and Jason will address the queries requested by Ahmet.
   • Test workflow for cloud computing
     • Craig provided detailed documentation for the Stanford team to implement the gateway interface.
     • Craig designed a sample interface layout which will be visible to the users. This interface will be designed such that the user can select a model (there will be an associated script to modify the model and a default configuration file), modify the config file if necessary and submit the model. An administration panel will be created so that other members (designated admins) can add models to the system. Another user interface for results will also be created.

2. Discuss specimen transportation device design and options.

3. Compare quotes from other vendors and finalize tissue testing equipment purchase.

• Snehal summarized the testing needs (tissue type, sample size, load and displacement ranges, data acquisition frequencies etc).
• A cost and feature comparison was done for all the potential machines (Instron, MTS, Bose and Biomomentum).
• The testing machine by Biomomentum Inc. (Mach-1 V500c) matches the basic testing needs.
• Ahmet prepared several combinations from basic to advanced from the available features for Mach 1 machines.
• Machines from Instron and Bose did not meet the feature and cost requirements and therefore will not be considered.

4. Decide tasks for the next meeting.