PURPOSE: X-ray fluoroscopy guidance is frequently used in medical interventions. Image-guided interventional procedures that employ localization for registration require accurate information about the C-arm's rotation angle that provides the data externally in real time. Optical, electromagnetic, and image-based pose tracking systems have limited convenience and accuracy. An alternative method to recover C-arm orientation was developed using an accelerometer as tilt sensor. METHODS: The fluoroscopic C-arm's orientation was estimated using a tri-axial acceleration sensor mounted on the X-ray detector as a tilt sensor. When the C-arm is stationary, the measured acceleration direction corresponds to the gravitational force direction. The accelerometer was calibrated with respect to the C-arm's rotation along its two axes, using a high-accuracy optical tracker as a reference. The scaling and offset error of the sensor was compensated using polynomial fitting. The system was evaluated on a GE OEC 9800 C-arm. Results obtained by accelerometer, built-in sensor, and image-based tracking were compared, using optical tracking as ground truth data. RESULTS: The accelerometer-based orientation measurement error for primary angle rotation was -0.1 ± 0.0° and for secondary angle rotation it was 0.1 ± 0.0°. The built-in sensor orientation measurement error for primary angle rotation was -0.1 ± 0.2°, and for secondary angle rotation it was 0.1 ± 0.2°. The image-based orientation measurement error for primary angle rotation was -0.1 ± 1.3°, and for secondary angle rotation it was -1.3 ± 0.3°. CONCLUSION: The accelerometer provided better results than the built-in sensor and image-based tracking. The accelerometer sensor is small, inexpensive, covers the full rotation range of the C-arm, does not require line of sight, and can be easily installed to any mobile X-ray machine. Therefore, accelerometer tilt sensing is a very promising applicant for orientation angle tracking of C-arm fluoroscopes.
PURPOSE: X-ray fluoroscopy guidance is frequently used in medical interventions. Image-guided interventional procedures that employ localization for registration require accurate information about the C-arm's rotation angle that provides the data externally in real time. Optical, electromagnetic, and image-based pose tracking systems have limited convenience and accuracy. An alternative method to recover C-arm orientation was developed using an accelerometer as tilt sensor. METHODS: The fluoroscopic C-arm's orientation was estimated using a tri-axial acceleration sensor mounted on the X-ray detector as a tilt sensor. When the C-arm is stationary, the measured acceleration direction corresponds to the gravitational force direction. The accelerometer was calibrated with respect to the C-arm's rotation along its two axes, using a high-accuracy optical tracker as a reference. The scaling and offset error of the sensor was compensated using polynomial fitting. The system was evaluated on a GE OEC 9800 C-arm. Results obtained by accelerometer, built-in sensor, and image-based tracking were compared, using optical tracking as ground truth data. RESULTS: The accelerometer-based orientation measurement error for primary angle rotation was -0.1 ± 0.0° and for secondary angle rotation it was 0.1 ± 0.0°. The built-in sensor orientation measurement error for primary angle rotation was -0.1 ± 0.2°, and for secondary angle rotation it was 0.1 ± 0.2°. The image-based orientation measurement error for primary angle rotation was -0.1 ± 1.3°, and for secondary angle rotation it was -1.3 ± 0.3°. CONCLUSION: The accelerometer provided better results than the built-in sensor and image-based tracking. The accelerometer sensor is small, inexpensive, covers the full rotation range of the C-arm, does not require line of sight, and can be easily installed to any mobile X-ray machine. Therefore, accelerometer tilt sensing is a very promising applicant for orientation angle tracking of C-arm fluoroscopes.
Authors: Ingmar Wegner; Dogu Teber; Boris Hadaschik; Sascha Pahernik; Markus Hohenfellner; Hans-Peter Meinzer; Johannes Huber Journal: Int J Med Robot Date: 2012-04-04 Impact factor: 2.547
Authors: Ehsan Dehghan; Mehdi Moradi; Xu Wen; Danny French; Julio Lobo; W James Morris; Septimiu E Salcudean; Gabor Fichtinger Journal: Med Phys Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Junghoon Lee; Christian Labat; Ameet K Jain; Danny Y Song; Everette Clif Burdette; Gabor Fichtinger; Jerry L Prince Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2010-07-19 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Gouthami Chintalapani; Ameet K Jain; David H Burkhardt; Jerry L Prince; Gabor Fichtinger Journal: Conf Comput Vis Pattern Recognit Workshops Date: 2008-06
Authors: Christoph Wilkmann; Nobutake Ito; Tobias Penzkofer; Peter Isfort; Hong-Sik Na; Michael Hennes; Catherine Disselhorst-Klug; Andreas H Mahnken; Christiane K Kuhl; Philipp Bruners Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg Date: 2014-06-28 Impact factor: 2.924