PURPOSE: To evaluate accuracy and procedure times of electromagnetic tracking (EMT) in a robotic arm mounted flat panel setting using phantom and animal cadaveric models. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A robotic arm mounted flat panel (RMFP) was used in combination with EMT to perform anthropomorphic phantom (n = 90) and ex vivo pig based punctures (n = 120) of lumbar facet joints (FJ, n = 120) and intervertebral discs (IVD, n = 90). Procedure accuracies and times were assessed and evaluated. RESULTS: FJ punctures were carried out with a spatial accuracy of 0.8 ± 0.9 mm (phantom) and 0.6 ± 0.8 mm (ex vivo) respectively. While IVD punctures showed puncture deviations of 0.6 ± 1.2 mm (phantom) and 0.5 ± 0.6 mm (ex vivo), direct and angulated phantom based punctures had accuracies of 0.8 ± 0.9 mm and 1.0 ± 1.3 mm. Planning took longer for ex vivo IVD punctures compared to phantom model interventions (39.3 ± 17.3 s vs. 20.8 ± 5.0 s, p = 0.001) and for angulated vs. direct phantom FJ punctures (19.7 ± 5.1 s vs. 28.6 ± 7.8 s, p < 0.001). Puncture times were longer for ex vivo procedures when compared to phantom model procedures in both FJ (37.9 ± 9.0 s vs. 23.6 ± 7.2 s, p = 0.001) and IVD punctures (43.9 ± 16.1 s vs. 31.1 ± 6.4 s, p = 0.026). CONCLUSION: The combination of RMFP with EMT provides an accurate method of navigation for spinal interventions such as facet joint punctures and intervertebral disc punctures.
PURPOSE: To evaluate accuracy and procedure times of electromagnetic tracking (EMT) in a robotic arm mounted flat panel setting using phantom and animal cadaveric models. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A robotic arm mounted flat panel (RMFP) was used in combination with EMT to perform anthropomorphic phantom (n = 90) and ex vivo pig based punctures (n = 120) of lumbar facet joints (FJ, n = 120) and intervertebral discs (IVD, n = 90). Procedure accuracies and times were assessed and evaluated. RESULTS: FJ punctures were carried out with a spatial accuracy of 0.8 ± 0.9 mm (phantom) and 0.6 ± 0.8 mm (ex vivo) respectively. While IVD punctures showed puncture deviations of 0.6 ± 1.2 mm (phantom) and 0.5 ± 0.6 mm (ex vivo), direct and angulated phantom based punctures had accuracies of 0.8 ± 0.9 mm and 1.0 ± 1.3 mm. Planning took longer for ex vivo IVD punctures compared to phantom model interventions (39.3 ± 17.3 s vs. 20.8 ± 5.0 s, p = 0.001) and for angulated vs. direct phantom FJ punctures (19.7 ± 5.1 s vs. 28.6 ± 7.8 s, p < 0.001). Puncture times were longer for ex vivo procedures when compared to phantom model procedures in both FJ (37.9 ± 9.0 s vs. 23.6 ± 7.2 s, p = 0.001) and IVD punctures (43.9 ± 16.1 s vs. 31.1 ± 6.4 s, p = 0.026). CONCLUSION: The combination of RMFP with EMT provides an accurate method of navigation for spinal interventions such as facet joint punctures and intervertebral disc punctures.
Authors: G A Krombach; A Mahnken; J Tacke; G Staatz; S Haller; C C Nolte-Ernsting; J Meyer; P Haage; R W Günther Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2001-05 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: Philipp Bruners; Tobias Penzkofer; Markus Nagel; Robert Elfring; Nina Gronloh; Thomas Schmitz-Rode; Rolf W Günther; Andreas H Mahnken Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2008-11-29 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Bernhard C Meyer; Olaf Peter; Markus Nagel; Martin Hoheisel; Bernd B Frericks; Karl-Jürgen Wolf; Frank K Wacker Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2008-06-11 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Boris Schulz; Katrin Eichler; Petra Siebenhandl; Tatjana Gruber-Rouh; Christoph Czerny; Thomas Josef Vogl; Stephan Zangos Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2012-07-21 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Tatjana Gruber-Rouh; Clara Lee; Jan Bolck; Nagy N N Naguib; Boris Schulz; Katrin Eichler; Rene Aschenbach; Julian L Wichmann; Thomas J Vogl; Stephan Zangos Journal: Korean J Radiol Date: 2015-07-01 Impact factor: 3.500
Authors: Miguel Pishnamaz; Christoph Wilkmann; Hong-Sik Na; Jochen Pfeffer; Christoph Hänisch; Max Janssen; Philipp Bruners; Philipp Kobbe; Frank Hildebrand; Thomas Schmitz-Rode; Hans-Christoph Pape Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-02-10 Impact factor: 3.240