Literature DB >> 31786552

Reliable navigation registration in cranial and spine surgery based on intraoperative computed tomography.

Barbara Carl1, Miriam Bopp1,2, Benjamin Saß1, Mirza Pojskic1, Marko Gjorgjevski1, Benjamin Voellger1, Christopher Nimsky1,2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Low registration errors are an important prerequisite for reliable navigation, independent of its use in cranial or spinal surgery. Regardless of whether navigation is used for trajectory alignment in biopsy or implant procedures, or for sophisticated augmented reality applications, all depend on a correct registration of patient space and image space. In contrast to fiducial, landmark, or surface matching-based registration, the application of intraoperative imaging allows user-independent automatic patient registration, which is less error prone. The authors' aim in this paper was to give an overview of their experience using intraoperative CT (iCT) scanning for automatic registration with a focus on registration accuracy and radiation exposure.
METHODS: A total of 645 patients underwent iCT scanning with a 32-slice movable CT scanner in combination with navigation for trajectory alignment in biopsy and implantation procedures (n = 222) and for augmented reality (n = 437) in cranial and spine procedures (347 craniotomies and 42 transsphenoidal, 56 frameless stereotactic, 59 frame-based stereotactic, and 141 spinal procedures). The target registration error was measured using skin fiducials that were not part of the registration procedure. The effective dose was calculated by multiplying the dose length product with conversion factors.
RESULTS: Among all 1281 iCT scans obtained, 1172 were used for automatic patient registration (645 initial registration scans and 527 repeat iCT scans). The overall mean target registration error was 0.86 ± 0.38 mm (± SD) (craniotomy, 0.88 ± 0.39 mm; transsphenoidal, 0.92 ± 0.39 mm; frameless, 0.74 ± 0.39 mm; frame-based, 0.84 ± 0.34 mm; and spinal, 0.80 ± 0.28 mm). Compared with standard diagnostic scans, a distinct reduction of the effective dose could be achieved using low-dose protocols for the initial registration scan with mean effective doses of 0.06 ± 0.04 mSv for cranial, 0.50 ± 0.09 mSv for cervical, 4.12 ± 2.13 mSv for thoracic, and 3.37 ± 0.93 mSv for lumbar scans without impeding registration accuracy.
CONCLUSIONS: Reliable automatic patient registration can be achieved using iCT scanning. Low-dose protocols ensured a low radiation exposure for the patient. Low-dose scanning had no negative effect on navigation accuracy.

Entities:  

Keywords:  AR = augmented reality; DBS = deep brain stimulation; DLP = dose length product; ED = effective dose; SEEG = stereo-electroencephalography; TRE = target registration error; augmented reality; cranial navigation; effective radiation dose; iCT = intraoperative CT; iMRI = intraoperative MRI; iUS = intraoperative ultrasound; intraoperative computed tomography; navigation registration; spine navigation

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31786552     DOI: 10.3171/2019.8.FOCUS19621

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurosurg Focus        ISSN: 1092-0684            Impact factor:   4.047


  12 in total

1.  Navigation-assisted full-endoscopic spine surgery: a technical note.

Authors:  Yasushi Shin; Hiromu Sunada; Yuki Shiraishi; Makoto Hosokawa; Yumi Koh; Rinsei Tei; Shuta Aketa; Yasushi Motoyama; Taiji Yonezawa; Hiroyuki Nakase
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2020-06

2.  Fluorescent intraoperative navigation: trends and beyond.

Authors:  Lixia Feng; Dawei Jiang
Journal:  Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2022-08-20

3.  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.  Virtual splint registration for electromagnetic and optical navigation in orbital and craniofacial surgery.

Authors:  Ruud Schreurs; F Baan; C Klop; L Dubois; L F M Beenen; P E M H Habets; A G Becking; T J J Maal
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-05-17       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 5.  Current innovation in virtual and augmented reality in spine surgery.

Authors:  Frank J Yuk; Georgios A Maragkos; Kosuke Sato; Jeremy Steinberger
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2021-01

6.  Augmented Reality in Neurosurgery, State of Art and Future Projections. A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Delia Cannizzaro; Ismail Zaed; Adrian Safa; Alice J M Jelmoni; Antonio Composto; Andrea Bisoglio; Kyra Schmeizer; Ana C Becker; Andrea Pizzi; Andrea Cardia; Franco Servadei
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-03-11

Review 7.  Intraoperative Imaging for High-Grade Glioma Surgery.

Authors:  Thomas Noh; Martina Mustroph; Alexandra J Golby
Journal:  Neurosurg Clin N Am       Date:  2020-11-05       Impact factor: 2.509

8.  Intraoperative Computed Tomography-Based Navigation with Augmented Reality for Lateral Approaches to the Spine.

Authors:  Mirza Pojskić; Miriam Bopp; Benjamin Saß; Andreas Kirschbaum; Christopher Nimsky; Barbara Carl
Journal:  Brain Sci       Date:  2021-05-15

Review 9.  XR (Extended Reality: Virtual Reality, Augmented Reality, Mixed Reality) Technology in Spine Medicine: Status Quo and Quo Vadis.

Authors:  Tadatsugu Morimoto; Takaomi Kobayashi; Hirohito Hirata; Koji Otani; Maki Sugimoto; Masatsugu Tsukamoto; Tomohito Yoshihara; Masaya Ueno; Masaaki Mawatari
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-01-17       Impact factor: 4.241

10.  Registration-free workflow for electromagnetic and optical navigation in orbital and craniofacial surgery.

Authors:  R Schreurs; F Baan; C Klop; L Dubois; L F M Beenen; P E M H Habets; A G Becking; T J J Maal
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-09-10       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.