Literature DB >> 19517342

Accuracy and feasibility of frameless stereotactic and robot-assisted CT-based puncture in interventional radiology: a comparative phantom study.

R Stoffner1, C Augschöll, G Widmann, D Böhler, R Bale.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy of frameless stereotactic and robot-assisted puncture in vitro based on computed tomography (CT) imaging with a slice thickness of 1, 3, and 5 mm.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: 300 punctures were carried out with help of the Atlas aiming device guided by the optical navigation system Stealth Station TREONplus and 150 punctures were guided by the robotic assistance system Innomotion. Conically shaped rods were punctured with Kirschner wires. The accuracy was evaluated on the basis of control CTs by measuring the Euclidean distance between the wire tip and target and the normal distance between the target and wire.
RESULTS: With the Stealth Station a mean Euclidean distance of 1.94 +/- 0.912, 2.2 +/- 1.136, and 2.74 +/- 1.166 mm at a slice thickness of 1, 3 and 5 mm, respectively, was reached. The mean normal distance was 1.64 +/- 0.919, 1.84 +/- 1.189, and 2.48 +/- 1.196 mm, respectively. The Innomotion system resulted in a mean Euclidean distance of 1.69 +/- 0.772, 1.91 +/- 0.673, and 2.30 +/- 0.881 mm, respectively, while the mean normal distance was 1.42 +/- 0.78), 1.60 +/- 0.733, and 1.98 +/- 1.002 mm, respectively. A statistical significance between accuracies with both systems with 1 mm and 3 mm slices could not be detected (p > 0.05). At a slice thickness of 5 mm, the robot was significantly more accurate, but not as accurate as when using thinner slices (p < 0.05). The procedure time is longer for the Innomotion system ( 30 vs. 18 min), and the practicability is higher with the Stealth Station.
CONCLUSION: The systems yield comparable accuracy. A slice thickness of 3 mm is adequate. Application of both methods in patient treatment can be expected to be safe and reliable. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart, New York.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19517342     DOI: 10.1055/s-0028-1109380

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Rofo        ISSN: 1438-9010


  7 in total

Review 1.  Advances in local ablation of malignant liver lesions.

Authors:  Robert M Eisele
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-04-21       Impact factor: 5.742

2.  Comparison of CT Fluoroscopy-Guided Manual and CT-Guided Robotic Positioning System for In Vivo Needle Placements in Swine Liver.

Authors:  F Cornelis; H Takaki; M Laskhmanan; J C Durack; J P Erinjeri; G I Getrajdman; M Maybody; C T Sofocleous; S B Solomon; G Srimathveeravalli
Journal:  Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol       Date:  2014-11-07       Impact factor: 2.740

3.  Comparison of a Robotic and Patient-Mounted Device for CT-Guided Needle Placement: A Phantom Study.

Authors:  Yannick Scharll; Alexander Mitteregger; Gregor Laimer; Christoph Schwabl; Peter Schullian; Reto Bale
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-06-28       Impact factor: 4.964

4.  Accuracy and efficacy of percutaneous biopsy and ablation using robotic assistance under computed tomography guidance: a phantom study.

Authors:  Yilun Koethe; Sheng Xu; Gnanasekar Velusamy; Bradford J Wood; Aradhana M Venkatesan
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-11-13       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Puncture accuracy of an optical tracked robotic aiming device-a phantom study.

Authors:  Yannick Scharll; Sofia Letrari; Gregor Laimer; Peter Schullian; Reto Bale
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2022-06-09       Impact factor: 7.034

6.  [Stereotaxy and robotics for ablation - toy or tool?].

Authors:  R Bale; G Widmann; W Jaschke
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 0.635

7.  Stereotactic Neuro-Navigation Phantom Designs: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Marko Švaco; Ivan Stiperski; Domagoj Dlaka; Filip Šuligoj; Bojan Jerbić; Darko Chudy; Marina Raguž
Journal:  Front Neurorobot       Date:  2020-10-23       Impact factor: 2.650

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.