Max Siekmann1, Thomas Lothes2, Ralph König3, Christian Rainer Wirtz3, Jan Coburger3. 1. Department of Traumatology and orthopedic surgery, Klinikum Nürnberg, Breslauer Straße 201, 90471, Nuremberg, Germany. max.siekmann@klinikum-nuernberg.de. 2. Departement of Pediatrics, Klinikum Kempten, Robert-Weixler-Straße 50, 88439, Kempten, Germany. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, University of Ulm, Campus Günzburg, Ludwig-Heilmeyer-Straße 2, 89312, Günzburg, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Currently, intraoperative ultrasound in brain tumor surgery is a rapidly propagating option in imaging technology. We examined the accuracy and resolution limits of different ultrasound probes and the influence of 3D-reconstruction in a phantom and compared these results to MRI in an intraoperative setting (iMRI). METHODS: An agarose gel phantom with predefined gel targets was examined with iMRI, a sector (SUS) and a linear (LUS) array probe with two-dimensional images. Additionally, 3D-reconstructed sweeps in perpendicular directions were made of every target with both probes, resulting in 392 measurements. Statistical calculations were performed, and comparative boxplots were generated. RESULTS: Every measurement of iMRI and LUS was more precise than SUS, while there was no apparent difference in height of iMRI and 3D-reconstructed LUS. Measurements with 3D-reconstructed LUS were always more accurate than in 2D-LUS, while 3D-reconstruction of SUS showed nearly no differences to 2D-SUS in some measurements. We found correlations of 3D-reconstructed SUS and LUS length and width measurements with 2D results in the same image orientation. CONCLUSIONS: LUS provides an accuracy and resolution comparable to iMRI, while SUS is less exact than LUS and iMRI. 3D-reconstruction showed the potential to distinctly improve accuracy and resolution of ultrasound images, although there is a strong correlation with the sweep direction during data acquisition.
PURPOSE: Currently, intraoperative ultrasound in brain tumor surgery is a rapidly propagating option in imaging technology. We examined the accuracy and resolution limits of different ultrasound probes and the influence of 3D-reconstruction in a phantom and compared these results to MRI in an intraoperative setting (iMRI). METHODS: An agarose gel phantom with predefined gel targets was examined with iMRI, a sector (SUS) and a linear (LUS) array probe with two-dimensional images. Additionally, 3D-reconstructed sweeps in perpendicular directions were made of every target with both probes, resulting in 392 measurements. Statistical calculations were performed, and comparative boxplots were generated. RESULTS: Every measurement of iMRI and LUS was more precise than SUS, while there was no apparent difference in height of iMRI and 3D-reconstructed LUS. Measurements with 3D-reconstructed LUS were always more accurate than in 2D-LUS, while 3D-reconstruction of SUS showed nearly no differences to 2D-SUS in some measurements. We found correlations of 3D-reconstructed SUS and LUS length and width measurements with 2D results in the same image orientation. CONCLUSIONS: LUS provides an accuracy and resolution comparable to iMRI, while SUS is less exact than LUS and iMRI. 3D-reconstruction showed the potential to distinctly improve accuracy and resolution of ultrasound images, although there is a strong correlation with the sweep direction during data acquisition.
Authors: A Gronningsaeter; A Kleven; S Ommedal; T E Aarseth; T Lie; F Lindseth; T Langø; G Unsgård Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2000-12 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Jan Coburger; Angelika Scheuerle; Thomas Kapapa; Jens Engelke; Dietmar Rudolf Thal; Christian R Wirtz; Ralph König Journal: Neurosurg Rev Date: 2015-04-10 Impact factor: 3.042
Authors: Carmel M Moran; Stephen D Pye; William Ellis; Anna Janeczko; Keith D Morris; Alan S McNeilly; Hamish M Fraser Journal: Ultrasound Med Biol Date: 2011-01-21 Impact factor: 2.998