| Literature DB >> 32412920 |
Michael A Pritchett1, Krish Bhadra2, Jennifer S Mattingley3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy (ENB) aids in lung lesion biopsy. However, anatomic divergence between the preprocedural computed tomography (CT) and the actual bronchial anatomy during the procedure can limit localization accuracy. An advanced ENB system has been designed to mitigate CT-to-body divergence using a tomosynthesis-based software algorithm that enhances nodule visibility and allows for intraprocedural local registration.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 32412920 PMCID: PMC7742212 DOI: 10.1097/LBR.0000000000000687
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Bronchology Interv Pulmonol ISSN: 1948-8270
FIGURE 1SuperDimension navigation system version 7.2 with fluoroscopic navigation technology. A, Initial navigation on the basis of the preprocedural planning computed tomography and the automatic registration showing the virtual target (green ball) and locatable guide (purple). B, Fluoroscopic image with no visualization of the nodule. C, Sagittal cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) before correction showing the catheter tip (orange arrow) outside of the target lesion (blue circle). D, Fluoroscopic navigation spin: rotation of the C-arm with continuous fluoroscopy captures 2-dimensional data from various angles around the patient and builds a 3-dimensional volume using a tomosynthesis algorithm. E, Following application of the algorithm and 3-dimensional volume creation, the nodule can now be visualized (orange arrow). F, With the local registration feature turned on, the true spatial relationship between the virtual target (green ball) and the locatable guide (in purple) is seen, before correction of the catheter position. G, After renavigation and correction of the catheter position, showing the locatable guide (in purple) aligned to the target (green ball). The red “ghost” catheters are the marked locations before correction with the local registration feature off (initial navigation) and after correction before realignment. H, Confirmatory sagittal CBCT, with insets for the axial (inset left) and coronal (inset right) views after correction showing the catheter tip inside the target lesion. The 3-dimensional percent overlap between the virtual target and the actual lesion in CBCT was 0% before correction in (C) and 23% after correction in (H). Images courtesy of Dr Michael Pritchett.
FIGURE 2Study procedure steps. Following standard navigation to the target lesion (the fluoroscopic navigation system allows local registration within 2.5 cm of the target) the locatable guide (LG) was locked in place and local registration was conducted. Before moving the catheter, cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) was conducted to allow an analysis of the initial spatial relationship between the virtual target and actual lesion (“before location correction” measure). The catheter was then repositioned on the basis of the local registration, and a second CBCT was conducted to allow an analysis of the updated relationship between the virtual target and actual lesion (“after location correction” measure). Biopsy sampling was then conducted according to standard practice. The primary endpoint was evaluated in all technically successful cases (n=47). Two subjects from each sweep had to be excluded because of observed movement of the catheter between the fluoroscopy and CBCT sweeps. An additional 4 cases could not be analyzed because of incorrect fluoroscope settings or corrupted files (not because of system error). This resulted in evaluable data sets of 41 subjects per group for the target overlap secondary endpoints.
FIGURE 3Calculation method for 3-dimensional percentage overlap of the virtual target and the actual target lesion. The dimensions of the virtual target (in red) were derived from the dimensions marked by the physician in the coronal, axial, and sagittal views during the planning procedure. The dimensions of the actual target lesion (in blue) in cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) were derived by manually scrolling through coronal slices to find the lesion center. The boundaries of the 2-dimensional ellipse were marked to calculate the x-axis and y-axis diameters. Then, the third dimension (z-axis) was obtained by scrolling through coronal slices in both directions (positive and negative) to find the beginning and end of the lesion. To calculate the percentage overlap, the locatable guide (LG) tip and target centers were marked on fluoroscopy images to obtain vectors (magnitude and direction relationship) between the LG tip and the target center in fluoroscopy images. Assuming the catheter did not move between the fluoroscopy sweep and the CBCT scan, the target location and size in CBCT coordinates were derived from the calculated vector from fluoroscopy. A software algorithm used the diameters and locations of the targets in CBCT coordinates to calculate the volume of the overlapping area of the 3-dimensional ellipsoids (in purple). Sphere wireframe images adapted from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sphere_wireframe_10deg_10r.svg under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported (CC BY 3.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en). Adaptations are themselves works protected by copyright. So in order to publish this adaptation, authorization must be obtained both from the owner of the copyright in the original work and from the owner of copyright in the translation or adaptation.
Subject, Lesion, and Procedural Characteristics (N=50 Subjects)
| Variable | n/N (%) or Mean±SD (N) [Median] (Min, Max) |
|---|---|
| Age | 69.8±7.7 (50) [70.0] (49.0, 84.0) |
| Female | 35/50 (70.0) |
| Male | 15/50 (30.0) |
| Race | |
| White | 43/50 (86.0) |
| Black or African American | 5/50 (10.0) |
| American Indian or Alaska Native | 2/50 (4.0) |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease | 31/50 (62.0) |
| Tobacco use (current or former) | 44/50 (88.0) |
| Lesion size (mm) | 20.0±9.6 (49) [17.0] (10.0, 52.0) |
| Lesions <20 mm | 30/49 (61.2) |
| Upper lobe location | 32/49 (65.3) |
| Distance from lesion to pleura | 10.4±12.2 (49) [5.9] (0.0, 47.4) |
| Bronchus sign present on CT | 26/49 (53.1) |
| Total procedure time, median (range)* (min) | 60 (28-128) |
| ENB-specific procedure time, median (range)† (min) | 54 (18-108) |
| Fluoroscopic navigation time, median (range)‡ (min) | 3.8 (0.2-7.9) |
Lesion data are only available in subjects with local registration attempted (49/50).
*Total procedure time: first entry of the bronchoscope to the last exit of the bronchoscope.
†ENB-specific procedure time: first entry of the extended working channel or locatable guide until the last exit of the extended working channel. This includes all study-specific fluoroscopy and CBCT steps which would not normally occur in standard practice.
‡Fluoroscopic navigation time: 2 sweeps pooled. Encompasses C-arm sweep, target marking, and algorithm computational time, inclusive of the initiation of the local registration applet to the time the updated catheter location was ready and on screen (not including CBCT), as measured by the system software.
CT indicates computed tomography; CBCT, cone-beam computed tomography; ENB, electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy.
FIGURE 4Percent overlap in evaluable cases (n=41) before and after correction of the catheter location on the basis of local registration.
FIGURE 5Examples of primary endpoint success (A–E) and failure (F) in coronal view. Center of the virtual target (red plus sign) and virtual target (green circle) before and after correction of the catheter location on the basis of local registration. The 3-dimensional percent overlap is shown below each image. Note that while a coronal slice is displayed, the percent overlap was calculated in 3 dimensions. F, The lesion was close to the pleural border and the operator felt pressure against the rib and backed away, yet the catheter was still adequately aligned to obtain a diagnosis.