Literature DB >> 29134472

Real-time wireless tumor tracking during breast conserving surgery.

Natasja Janssen1, Roeland Eppenga2, Marie-Jeanne Vrancken Peeters2, Frederieke van Duijnhoven2, Hester Oldenburg2, Jos van der Hage2, Emiel Rutgers2, Jan-Jakob Sonke1, Koert Kuhlmann2, Theo Ruers2,3, Jasper Nijkamp4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate a novel surgical navigation system for breast conserving surgery (BCS), based on real-time tumor tracking using the Calypso[Formula: see text] 4D Localization System (Varian Medical Systems Inc., USA). Navigation-guided breast conserving surgery (Nav-BCS) was compared to conventional iodine seed-guided BCS ([Formula: see text]I-BCS).
METHODS: Two breast phantom types were produced, containing spherical and complex tumors in which wireless transponders (Nav-BCS) or a iodine seed ([Formula: see text]I-BCS) were implanted. For navigation, orthogonal views and 3D volume renders of a CT of the phantom were shown, including a tumor segmentation and a predetermined resection margin. In the same views, a surgical pointer was tracked and visualized. [Formula: see text]I-BCS was performed according to standard protocol. Five surgical breast oncologists first performed a practice session with Nav-BCS, followed by two Nav-BCS and [Formula: see text]I-BCS sessions on spherical and complex tumors. Postoperative CT images of all resection specimens were registered to the preoperative CT. Main outcome measures were the minimum resection margin (in mm) and the excision times.
RESULTS: The rate of incomplete tumor resections was 6.7% for Nav-BCS and 20% for [Formula: see text]I-BCS. The minimum resection margins on the spherical tumors were 3.0 ± 1.4 mm for Nav-BCS and 2.5 ± 1.6 mm for [Formula: see text]I-BCS (p = 0.63). For the complex tumors, these were 2.2 ± 1.1 mm (Nav-BCS) and 0.9 ± 2.4 mm ([Formula: see text]I-BCS) (p = 0.32). Mean excision times on spherical and complex tumors were 9.5 ±  2.7 min and 9.4 ± 2.6 min (Nav-BCS), compared to 5.8 ± 2.2  min and 4.7 ± 3.4 min ([Formula: see text]I-BCS, both (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The presented surgical navigation system improved the intra-operative awareness about tumor position and orientation, with the potential to improve surgical outcomes for non-palpable breast tumors. Results are positive, and participating surgeons were enthusiastic, but extended surgical experience on real breast tissue is required.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast conserving surgery; EM navigation; Real-time; Tracking; Wireless

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29134472     DOI: 10.1007/s11548-017-1684-4

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


  21 in total

1.  Utilization of Multiple I-125 Radioactive Seeds in the Same Breast is Safe and Feasible: A Multi-institutional Experience.

Authors:  Zahraa Al-Hilli; Katrina N Glazebrook; Sarah A McLaughlin; Danielle M Chan; Kyle T Robinson; Jamie G Giesbrandt; Evelyn L Slomka; Victor J Pizzitola; Richard J Gray; James W Jakub
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2015-07-29       Impact factor: 5.344

2.  Positional stability of electromagnetic transponders used for prostate localization and continuous, real-time tracking.

Authors:  Dale W Litzenberg; Twyla R Willoughby; James M Balter; Howard M Sandler; John Wei; Patrick A Kupelian; Alexis A Cunningham; Andrea Bock; Michele Aubin; Mack Roach; Katsuto Shinohara; Jean Pouliot
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2007-05-21       Impact factor: 7.038

3.  Radioactive seed localization of breast lesions: an adequate localization method without seed migration.

Authors:  Tanja Alderliesten; Claudette E Loo; Kenneth E Pengel; Emiel J Th Rutgers; Kenneth G A Gilhuijs; Marie-Jeanne T F D Vrancken Peeters
Journal:  Breast J       Date:  2011-09-12       Impact factor: 2.431

4.  Radioactive Seed Localization or Wire-guided Localization of Nonpalpable Invasive and In Situ Breast Cancer: A Randomized, Multicenter, Open-label Trial.

Authors:  Linnea Langhans; Tove F Tvedskov; Thomas L Klausen; Maj-Britt Jensen; Maj-Lis Talman; Ilse Vejborg; Cemil Benian; Anne Roslind; Jonas Hermansen; Peter S Oturai; Niels Bentzon; Niels Kroman
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 12.969

5.  Variation between hospitals in surgical margins after first breast-conserving surgery in the Netherlands.

Authors:  Margriet van der Heiden-van der Loo; Linda de Munck; Otto Visser; Pieter J Westenend; Thijs van Dalen; Marian B Menke; Emiel J Rutgers; Petra H Peeters
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2011-10-11       Impact factor: 4.872

6.  Electromagnetic tracking in surgical and interventional environments: usability study.

Authors:  Elodie Lugez; Hossein Sadjadi; David R Pichora; Randy E Ellis; Selim G Akl; Gabor Fichtinger
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2014-09-06       Impact factor: 2.924

7.  Radioactive seed localization in breast cancer treatment.

Authors:  N N Y Janssen; J Nijkamp; T Alderliesten; C E Loo; E J T Rutgers; J-J Sonke; M T F D Vrancken Peeters
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2015-10-27       Impact factor: 6.939

8.  PLUS: open-source toolkit for ultrasound-guided intervention systems.

Authors:  Andras Lasso; Tamas Heffter; Adam Rankin; Csaba Pinter; Tamas Ungi; Gabor Fichtinger
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2014-05-09       Impact factor: 4.538

9.  Standardized accuracy assessment of the calypso wireless transponder tracking system.

Authors:  A M Franz; D Schmitt; A Seitel; M Chatrasingh; G Echner; U Oelfke; S Nill; W Birkfellner; L Maier-Hein
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2014-10-21       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 10.  Expanding the use of real-time electromagnetic tracking in radiation oncology.

Authors:  Amish P Shah; Patrick A Kupelian; Twyla R Willoughby; Sanford L Meeks
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2011-11-15       Impact factor: 2.102

View more
  6 in total

1.  A computer-assisted system for handheld whole-breast ultrasonography.

Authors:  Filip Šroubek; Michal Bartoš; Jan Schier; Zuzana Bílková; Barbara Zitová; Jan Vydra; Iva Macová; Jan Daneš; Lukáš Lambert
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2019-01-23       Impact factor: 2.924

2.  Accuracy assessment of wireless transponder tracking in the operating room environment.

Authors:  Roeland Eppenga; Koert Kuhlmann; Theo Ruers; Jasper Nijkamp
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2018-08-11       Impact factor: 2.924

3.  Accuracy assessment of target tracking using two 5-degrees-of-freedom wireless transponders.

Authors:  Roeland Eppenga; Koert Kuhlmann; Theo Ruers; Jasper Nijkamp
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2019-11-14       Impact factor: 2.924

4.  Real-Time Wireless Tumor Tracking in Navigated Liver Resections: An Ex Vivo Feasibility Study.

Authors:  Roeland Eppenga; Wout Heerink; Jasper Smit; Koert Kuhlmann; Theo Ruers; Jasper Nijkamp
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2022-02-23       Impact factor: 4.339

5.  Bridging 3D Slicer and ROS2 for Image-Guided Robotic Interventions.

Authors:  Laura Connolly; Anton Deguet; Simon Leonard; Junichi Tokuda; Tamas Ungi; Axel Krieger; Peter Kazanzides; Parvin Mousavi; Gabor Fichtinger; Russell H Taylor
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-17       Impact factor: 3.847

6.  Accurate surgical navigation with real-time tumor tracking in cancer surgery.

Authors:  Jasper Nijkamp; Theo J M Ruers; Esther N D Kok; Roeland Eppenga; Koert F D Kuhlmann; Harald C Groen; Ruben van Veen; Jolanda M van Dieren; Thomas R de Wijkerslooth; Monique van Leerdam; Doenja M J Lambregts; Wouter J Heerink; Nikie J Hoetjes; Oleksandra Ivashchenko; Geerard L Beets; Arend G J Aalbers
Journal:  NPJ Precis Oncol       Date:  2020-04-08
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.