Literature DB >> 25578991

Assessment of registration accuracy during computer-aided oncologic limb-salvage surgery.

Kurt E Stoll1, Joan D Miles, Jedediah K White, Stephanie E W Punt, Ernest U Conrad, Randal P Ching.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Computer-aided surgery is used in musculoskeletal tumor procedures to improve the surgeon's orientation to local anatomy during tumor resection. For the navigation system to function correctly, preoperative imaging (e.g., CT, MR) must be registered to the patient in the operating room. The goals of this study were (1) to directly quantify registration accuracy in computer-aided tumor surgery and (2) to validate the "system reported error" (SRE) of the navigation system.
METHODS: Registration accuracy was evaluated in eight bone sarcoma cases by determining the location of the anatomical paired-points used for registration following surface matching. Coordinates of specific intraoperative post-registration points were compared with the corresponding coordinates in preoperative CT scans to determine the measurement error (ME).
RESULTS: The mean difference between post-registration points and planned registration points was 12.21±6.52 mm significantly higher than the mean SRE (0.68 ± 0.15 mm; p = 0.002; 95 % CI 6.11-16.96 mm). The SRE poorly correlated with the calculated ME (R(2) = 0.040). Anatomical paired-point registration with surface matching results in a substantial shift in the post-registration coordinates of the same paired-points used for registration, and this shift is not represented by the SRE.
CONCLUSION: The SRE of a surgical navigation system was poorly correlated with direct measurements obtained in musculoskeletal tumor surgery. Improvement in registration accuracy is needed to better navigate tumor boundaries and ensure clear margins while maximally preserving the unaffected tissues and reducing operative morbidity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25578991     DOI: 10.1007/s11548-014-1146-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg        ISSN: 1861-6410            Impact factor:   2.924


  29 in total

Review 1.  Potential pitfalls of computer aided orthopedic surgery.

Authors:  Frank Langlotz
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 2.586

Review 2.  Medical image registration: a review.

Authors:  Francisco P M Oliveira; João Manuel R S Tavares
Journal:  Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin       Date:  2012-03-22       Impact factor: 1.763

3.  Computer assisted navigation in total knee arthroplasty: comparison with conventional methods.

Authors:  Kevin C Anderson; Knute C Buehler; David C Markel
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 4.757

4.  Computer-assisted sacral tumor resection. A case report.

Authors:  Hwan Seong Cho; Hyun Guy Kang; Han-Soo Kim; Ilkyu Han
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  Registration accuracy in computer-assisted pelvic surgery.

Authors:  P L Docquier; L Paul; O Cartiaux; X Banse
Journal:  Comput Aided Surg       Date:  2009

6.  Comparative results between conventional and computer-assisted pedicle screw installation in the thoracic, lumbar, and sacral spine.

Authors:  L P Amiot; K Lang; M Putzier; H Zippel; H Labelle
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-03-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 7.  Surgery for MSK tumors: 1971-2011.

Authors:  Dempsey Springfield
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2011-08-10       Impact factor: 2.199

8.  Computer assisted orthopaedic and trauma surgery. State of the art and future perspectives.

Authors:  N W L Schep; I A M J Broeders; Chr van der Werken
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 2.586

9.  New indications for computer-assisted surgery: tumor resection in the pelvis.

Authors:  Tobias Hüfner; Maurício Kfuri; Michael Galanski; Leonard Bastian; Martin Loss; Tim Pohlemann; Christian Krettek
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Surgical inaccuracy of tumor resection and reconstruction within the pelvis: an experimental study.

Authors:  Olivier Cartiaux; Pierre-Louis Docquier; Laurent Paul; Bernard G Francq; Olivier H Cornu; Christian Delloye; Benoit Raucent; Bruno Dehez; Xavier Banse
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 3.717

View more
  4 in total

1.  Are Skin Fiducials Comparable to Bone Fiducials for Registration When Planning Navigation-assisted Musculoskeletal Tumor Resections in a Cadaveric Simulated Tumor Model?

Authors:  Rodolfo Zamora; Stephanie E Punt; Claudia Christman-Skieller; Cengiz Yildirim; John C Shapton; Ernest U Conrad
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  A hybrid feature-based patient-to-image registration method for robot-assisted long bone osteotomy.

Authors:  Chunlei Zhang; Yu Liu; Yunguang Zhang; He Li
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2021-06-26       Impact factor: 2.924

3.  Automatic Registration and Error Color Maps to Improve Accuracy for Navigated Bone Tumor Surgery Using Intraoperative Cone-Beam CT.

Authors:  Axel Sahovaler; Michael J Daly; Harley H L Chan; Prakash Nayak; Sharon Tzelnick; Michelle Arkhangorodsky; Jimmy Qiu; Robert Weersink; Jonathan C Irish; Peter Ferguson; Jay S Wunder
Journal:  JB JS Open Access       Date:  2022-05-05

4.  Report on a novel bone registration method: A rapid, accurate, and radiation-free technique for computer- and robotic-assisted orthopedic surgeries.

Authors:  Guangyu He; Vamiq M Mustahsan; Michael R Bielski; Imin Kao; Fazel A Khan
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2021-01-30
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.