BACKGROUND: Neuronavigation has become an intrinsic part of preoperative surgical planning and surgical procedures. However, many surgeons have the impression that accuracy decreases during surgery. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the decrease of neuronavigation accuracy and identify possible origins, we performed a retrospective quality-control study. METHODS: Between April and July 2011, a neuronavigation system was used in conjunction with a specially prepared head holder in 55 consecutive patients. Two different neuronavigation systems were investigated separately. Coregistration was performed with laser-surface matching, paired-point matching using skin fiducials, anatomic landmarks, or bone screws. The initial target registration error (TRE1) was measured using the nasion as the anatomic landmark. Then, after draping and during surgery, the accuracy was checked at predefined procedural landmark steps (Mayfield measurement point and bone measurement point), and deviations were recorded. RESULTS: After initial coregistration, the mean (SD) TRE1 was 2.9 (3.3) mm. The TRE1 was significantly dependent on patient positioning, lesion localization, type of neuroimaging, and coregistration method. The following procedures decreased neuronavigation accuracy: attachment of surgical drapes (DTRE2 = 2.7 [1.7] mm), skin retractor attachment (DTRE3 = 1.2 [1.0] mm), craniotomy (DTRE3 = 1.0 [1.4] mm), and Halo ring installation (DTRE3 = 0.5 [0.5] mm). Surgery duration was a significant factor also; the overall DTRE was 1.3 [1.5] mm after 30 minutes and increased to 4.4 [1.8] mm after 5.5 hours of surgery. CONCLUSION: After registration, there is an ongoing loss of neuronavigation accuracy. The major factors were draping, attachment of skin retractors, and duration of surgery. Surgeons should be aware of this silent loss of accuracy when using neuronavigation.
BACKGROUND: Neuronavigation has become an intrinsic part of preoperative surgical planning and surgical procedures. However, many surgeons have the impression that accuracy decreases during surgery. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the decrease of neuronavigation accuracy and identify possible origins, we performed a retrospective quality-control study. METHODS: Between April and July 2011, a neuronavigation system was used in conjunction with a specially prepared head holder in 55 consecutive patients. Two different neuronavigation systems were investigated separately. Coregistration was performed with laser-surface matching, paired-point matching using skin fiducials, anatomic landmarks, or bone screws. The initial target registration error (TRE1) was measured using the nasion as the anatomic landmark. Then, after draping and during surgery, the accuracy was checked at predefined procedural landmark steps (Mayfield measurement point and bone measurement point), and deviations were recorded. RESULTS: After initial coregistration, the mean (SD) TRE1 was 2.9 (3.3) mm. The TRE1 was significantly dependent on patient positioning, lesion localization, type of neuroimaging, and coregistration method. The following procedures decreased neuronavigation accuracy: attachment of surgical drapes (DTRE2 = 2.7 [1.7] mm), skin retractor attachment (DTRE3 = 1.2 [1.0] mm), craniotomy (DTRE3 = 1.0 [1.4] mm), and Halo ring installation (DTRE3 = 0.5 [0.5] mm). Surgery duration was a significant factor also; the overall DTRE was 1.3 [1.5] mm after 30 minutes and increased to 4.4 [1.8] mm after 5.5 hours of surgery. CONCLUSION: After registration, there is an ongoing loss of neuronavigation accuracy. The major factors were draping, attachment of skin retractors, and duration of surgery. Surgeons should be aware of this silent loss of accuracy when using neuronavigation.
Authors: Simon Drouin; Anna Kochanowska; Marta Kersten-Oertel; Ian J Gerard; Rina Zelmann; Dante De Nigris; Silvain Bériault; Tal Arbel; Denis Sirhan; Abbas F Sadikot; Jeffery A Hall; David S Sinclair; Kevin Petrecca; Rolando F DelMaestro; D Louis Collins Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg Date: 2016-08-31 Impact factor: 2.924
Authors: Max Siekmann; Thomas Lothes; Ralph König; Christian Rainer Wirtz; Jan Coburger Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg Date: 2018-01-24 Impact factor: 2.924
Authors: Patrick S Wellborn; Neal P Dillon; Paul T Russell; Robert J Webster Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg Date: 2017-03-30 Impact factor: 2.924