Michael I Miga1,2,3, Kay Sun1, Ishita Chen1, Logan W Clements4, Thomas S Pheiffer1, Amber L Simpson5, Reid C Thompson3. 1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Box 351631, Station B, Nashville, TN, 37235, USA. 2. Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. 3. Department of Neurological Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. 4. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Box 351631, Station B, Nashville, TN, 37235, USA. logan.clements@vanderbilt.edu. 5. Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Brain shift during neurosurgical procedures must be corrected for in order to reestablish accurate alignment for successful image-guided tumor resection. Sparse-data-driven biomechanical models that predict physiological brain shift by accounting for typical deformation-inducing events such as cerebrospinal fluid drainage, hyperosmotic drugs, swelling, retraction, resection, and tumor cavity collapse are an inexpensive solution. This study evaluated the robustness and accuracy of a biomechanical model-based brain shift correction system to assist with tumor resection surgery in 16 clinical cases. METHODS: Preoperative computation involved the generation of a patient-specific finite element model of the brain and creation of an atlas of brain deformation solutions calculated using a distribution of boundary and deformation-inducing forcing conditions (e.g., sag, tissue contraction, and tissue swelling). The optimum brain shift solution was determined using an inverse problem approach which linearly combines solutions from the atlas to match the cortical surface deformation data collected intraoperatively. The computed deformations were then used to update the preoperative images for all 16 patients. RESULTS: The mean brain shift measured ranged on average from 2.5 to 21.3 mm, and the biomechanical model-based correction system managed to account for the bulk of the brain shift, producing a mean corrected error ranging on average from 0.7 to 4.0 mm. CONCLUSIONS: Biomechanical models are an inexpensive means to assist intervention via correction for brain deformations that can compromise surgical navigation systems. To our knowledge, this study represents the most comprehensive clinical evaluation of a deformation correction pipeline for image-guided neurosurgery.
PURPOSE: Brain shift during neurosurgical procedures must be corrected for in order to reestablish accurate alignment for successful image-guided tumor resection. Sparse-data-driven biomechanical models that predict physiological brain shift by accounting for typical deformation-inducing events such as cerebrospinal fluid drainage, hyperosmotic drugs, swelling, retraction, resection, and tumor cavity collapse are an inexpensive solution. This study evaluated the robustness and accuracy of a biomechanical model-based brain shift correction system to assist with tumor resection surgery in 16 clinical cases. METHODS: Preoperative computation involved the generation of a patient-specific finite element model of the brain and creation of an atlas of brain deformation solutions calculated using a distribution of boundary and deformation-inducing forcing conditions (e.g., sag, tissue contraction, and tissue swelling). The optimum brain shift solution was determined using an inverse problem approach which linearly combines solutions from the atlas to match the cortical surface deformation data collected intraoperatively. The computed deformations were then used to update the preoperative images for all 16 patients. RESULTS: The mean brain shift measured ranged on average from 2.5 to 21.3 mm, and the biomechanical model-based correction system managed to account for the bulk of the brain shift, producing a mean corrected error ranging on average from 0.7 to 4.0 mm. CONCLUSIONS: Biomechanical models are an inexpensive means to assist intervention via correction for brain deformations that can compromise surgical navigation systems. To our knowledge, this study represents the most comprehensive clinical evaluation of a deformation correction pipeline for image-guided neurosurgery.
Authors: Tuhin K Sinha; Benoit M Dawant; Valerie Duay; David M Cash; Robert J Weil; Reid C Thompson; Kyle D Weaver; Michael I Miga Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Hai Sun; Karen E Lunn; Hany Farid; Ziji Wu; David W Roberts; Alex Hartov; Keith D Paulsen Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Ankur N Kumar; Michael I Miga; Thomas S Pheiffer; Lola B Chambless; Reid C Thompson; Benoit M Dawant Journal: Med Image Anal Date: 2014-08-07 Impact factor: 8.545
Authors: C R Maurer; D L Hill; A J Martin; H Liu; M McCue; D Rueckert; D Lloret; W A Hall; R E Maxwell; D J Hawkes; C L Truwit Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 1998-10 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Rohan C Vijayan; Reid C Thompson; Lola B Chambless; Peter J Morone; Le He; Logan W Clements; Rebekah H Griesenauer; Hakmook Kang; Michael I Miga Journal: J Med Imaging (Bellingham) Date: 2017-03-02
Authors: Sarah Frisken; Ma Luo; Parikshit Juvekar; Adomas Bunevicius; Ines Machado; Prashin Unadkat; Melina M Bertotti; Matt Toews; William M Wells; Michael I Miga; Alexandra J Golby Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg Date: 2019-08-23 Impact factor: 2.924
Authors: Ma Luo; Sarah F Frisken; Jared A Weis; Logan W Clements; Prashin Unadkat; Reid C Thompson; Alexandra J Golby; Michael I Miga Journal: J Med Imaging (Bellingham) Date: 2017-09-13
Authors: Saramati Narasimhan; Jared A Weis; Ma Luo; Amber L Simpson; Reid C Thompson; Michael I Miga Journal: J Med Imaging (Bellingham) Date: 2020-06-22
Authors: Nazim Haouchine; Parikshit Juvekar; William M Wells; Stephane Cotin; Alexandra Golby; Sarah Frisken Journal: Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv Date: 2020-09-29
Authors: Nazim Haouchine; Parikshit Juvekar; Alexandra Golby; William M Wells; Stephane Cotin; Sarah Frisken Journal: Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng Date: 2020-03-16
Authors: Nazim Haouchine; Parikshit Juvekar; Michael Nercessian; William Wells; Alexandra Golby; Sarah Frisken Journal: IEEE Trans Biomed Eng Date: 2022-03-18 Impact factor: 4.538
Authors: Günther Grabner; Thomas Haider; Mark Glassner; Alexander Rauscher; Hannes Traxler; Siegfried Trattnig; Simon D Robinson Journal: Front Neurosci Date: 2017-06-21 Impact factor: 4.677