Literature DB >> 10862132

Comparative tracking error analysis of five different optical tracking systems.

R Khadem1, C C Yeh, M Sadeghi-Tehrani, M R Bax, J A Johnson, J N Welch, E P Wilkinson, R Shahidi.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Effective utilization of an optical tracking system for image-based surgical guidance requires optimal placement of the dynamic reference frame (DRF) with respect to the tracking camera. Unlike other studies that measure the overall accuracy of a particular navigation system, this study investigates the precision of one component of the navigation system: the optical tracking system (OTS). The precision of OTS measurements is quantified as jitter. By measuring jitter, one can better understand how system inaccuracies depend on the position of the DRF with respect to the camera.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Both FlashPointtrade mark (Image Guided Technologies, Inc., Boulder, Colorado) and Polaristrade mark (Northern Digital Inc., Ontario, Canada) optical tracking systems were tested in five different camera and DRF configurations. A linear testing apparatus with a software interface was designed to facilitate data collection. Jitter measurements were collected over a single quadrant within the camera viewing volume, as symmetry was assumed about the horizontal and vertical axes.
RESULTS: Excluding the highest 5% of jitter, the FlashPoint cameras had an RMS jitter range of 0.028 +/- 0.012 mm for the 300 mm model, 0.051 +/- 0.038 mm for the 580 mm model, and 0.059 +/- 0.047 mm for the 1 m model. The Polaris camera had an RMS jitter range of 0.058 +/- 0.037 mm with an active DRF and 0.115 +/- 0.075 mm with a passive DRF.
CONCLUSION: Both FlashPoint and Polaris have jitter less than 0.11 mm, although the error distributions differ significantly. Total jitter for all systems is dominated by the component measured in the axis directed away from the camera. Copyright 2000 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10862132     DOI: 10.1002/1097-0150(2000)5:2<98::AID-IGS4>3.0.CO;2-H

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Comput Aided Surg        ISSN: 1092-9088


  42 in total

Review 1.  Computer assisted navigation in knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Dae Kyung Bae; Sang Jun Song
Journal:  Clin Orthop Surg       Date:  2011-12-01

Review 2.  Current opinion on computer-aided surgical navigation and robotics: role in the treatment of sports-related injuries.

Authors:  Volker Musahl; Anton Plakseychuk; Freddie H Fu
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 11.136

3.  [Precision of navigation-assisted surgery of the thoracic and lumbar spine].

Authors:  M Arand; M Schempf; D Hebold; S Teller; L Kinzl; F Gebhard
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 1.000

4.  The accuracy of bone tunnel position using fluoroscopic-based navigation system in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Yohei Kawakami; Takafumi Hiranaka; Tomoyuki Matsumoto; Yuichi Hida; Tomoaki Fukui; Harunobu Uemoto; Minoru Doita; Mitsuo Tsuji; Masahiro Kurosaka; Ryosuke Kuroda
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2011-10-22       Impact factor: 4.342

5.  Marker-free registration for the accurate integration of CT images and the subject's anatomy during navigation surgery of the maxillary sinus.

Authors:  S-H Kang; M-K Kim; J-H Kim; H-K Park; W Park
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2012-04-12       Impact factor: 2.419

6.  Novel 3-D laparoscopic magnetic ultrasound image guidance for lesion targeting.

Authors:  David Sindram; Iain H McKillop; John B Martinie; David A Iannitti
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 3.647

Review 7.  [Precision in orthopaedic computer navigation].

Authors:  T Hüfner; D Kendoff; M Citak; J Geerling; C Krettek
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 1.087

8.  Development of a navigation system for minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Authors:  H G Kenngott; J Neuhaus; B P Müller-Stich; I Wolf; M Vetter; H-P Meinzer; J Köninger; M W Büchler; C N Gutt
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-12-20       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  The arcuate ligament revisited: role of the posterolateral structures in providing static stability in the knee joint.

Authors:  M Thaunat; C Pioger; R Chatellard; J Conteduca; A Khaleel; B Sonnery-Cottet
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2013-08-31       Impact factor: 4.342

10.  Comparing calibration approaches for 3D ultrasound probes.

Authors:  C Bergmeir; M Seitel; C Frank; R De Simone; H-P Meinzer; I Wolf
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2008-11-04       Impact factor: 2.924

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.