Influence of different registration modalities on navigation accuracy in ear, nose, and throat surgery depending on the surgical field

Objectives/Hypothesis: Various invasive and noninvasive registration methods have been established in the past for intraoperative navigation. The present study compared the registration and navigation accuracy of three different registration modalities in anatomical locations of special interest for...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Laryngoscope 2010-05, Vol.120 (5), p.881-888
Hauptverfasser: Grauvogel, Tanja D., Soteriou, Eric, Metzger, Marc C., Berlis, Ansgar, Maier, Wolfgang
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 888
container_issue 5
container_start_page 881
container_title The Laryngoscope
container_volume 120
creator Grauvogel, Tanja D.
Soteriou, Eric
Metzger, Marc C.
Berlis, Ansgar
Maier, Wolfgang
description Objectives/Hypothesis: Various invasive and noninvasive registration methods have been established in the past for intraoperative navigation. The present study compared the registration and navigation accuracy of three different registration modalities in anatomical locations of special interest for ear, nose, and throat surgery. Study Design: Prospective experimental phantom study. Methods: Four skull models were individually fabricated with a three‐dimensional printer based on the patient's computed tomography data sets and fitted with an individual customized silicone skin. Three different registration modalities were examined: 1) invasive marker (IM), 2) oral splint (OS), and 3) laser scan (L). Accuracy measurements were assessed by targeting 26 titanium screws placed over the skull. The overall accuracy and the target registration error for eight selected anatomical locations were measured. Results: Mean accuracy was 0.67 ± 0.1 mm (quadratic mean ± standard deviation) for IM, 0.98 ± 0.16 mm for OS, and 1.3 ± 0.12 mm for L. The greatest differences in accuracy were found on the mastoid with best accuracy for IM (0.59 ± 0.2 mm; P < .05 vs. OS and L), followed by OS (1.23 ± 0.41 mm; P < .05 vs. L), and L (1.88 ± 0.45 mm). In contrast, only small differences in accuracy were detected in the anterior skull base between the registration modalities (IM 0.75 ± 0.21 mm, OS 0.71 ± 0.27 mm, L 0.93 ± 0.34 mm). Conclusions: L and OS meet accuracy requirements in the midface and anterior skull base. OS is superior to L with navigation accuracies comparable to marker registration. However, neither method meets the high precision requirements for lateral skull base surgery. Laryngoscope, 2010
doi_str_mv 10.1002/lary.20867
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_733525904</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>733525904</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4987-7300f461020e5e150f0e6cf3bab7651d653366e266881d19557410212c4c4e933</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kctuEzEUhi0EoqGw4QGQN6gS6hRfxvbMsqpoWjXiJhCwshzPcWpwPMGegeYFeG6cTlp2rCzr_85_5M8IPafkhBLCXgeTtieMNFI9QDMqOK3qthUP0ayEvGoE-3qAnuT8nRCquCCP0QEjNWOyITP05zK6MEK0gHuHO-8cJIgDTrDyeUhm8H3E674zwQ8eMi63aH751RQYa8dk7Bb7iMGkYxz7DMfYxA4P16k3A85jWkHa4g42EDsfV7uG4RpuA29NwM5D6J6iR86EDM_25yH6fP7m09lFtXg3vzw7XVS2bhtVKU6IqyUljIAAKogjIK3jS7NUUtBOCs6lBCZl09COtkKousCU2drW0HJ-iI6m3k3qf46QB7322UIIJkI_Zq04F0y0pC7kq4m0qc85gdOb5NfFtKZE77TrnXZ9q73AL_a143IN3T1657kAL_eAyeXRLploff7HMdU2RLSFoxP32wfY_melXpx-_Ha3vJpmyofBzf2MST90SZXQX97OtfpwdT6_at7rBf8LiTiqQQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>733525904</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Influence of different registration modalities on navigation accuracy in ear, nose, and throat surgery depending on the surgical field</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Grauvogel, Tanja D. ; Soteriou, Eric ; Metzger, Marc C. ; Berlis, Ansgar ; Maier, Wolfgang</creator><creatorcontrib>Grauvogel, Tanja D. ; Soteriou, Eric ; Metzger, Marc C. ; Berlis, Ansgar ; Maier, Wolfgang</creatorcontrib><description>Objectives/Hypothesis: Various invasive and noninvasive registration methods have been established in the past for intraoperative navigation. The present study compared the registration and navigation accuracy of three different registration modalities in anatomical locations of special interest for ear, nose, and throat surgery. Study Design: Prospective experimental phantom study. Methods: Four skull models were individually fabricated with a three‐dimensional printer based on the patient's computed tomography data sets and fitted with an individual customized silicone skin. Three different registration modalities were examined: 1) invasive marker (IM), 2) oral splint (OS), and 3) laser scan (L). Accuracy measurements were assessed by targeting 26 titanium screws placed over the skull. The overall accuracy and the target registration error for eight selected anatomical locations were measured. Results: Mean accuracy was 0.67 ± 0.1 mm (quadratic mean ± standard deviation) for IM, 0.98 ± 0.16 mm for OS, and 1.3 ± 0.12 mm for L. The greatest differences in accuracy were found on the mastoid with best accuracy for IM (0.59 ± 0.2 mm; P &lt; .05 vs. OS and L), followed by OS (1.23 ± 0.41 mm; P &lt; .05 vs. L), and L (1.88 ± 0.45 mm). In contrast, only small differences in accuracy were detected in the anterior skull base between the registration modalities (IM 0.75 ± 0.21 mm, OS 0.71 ± 0.27 mm, L 0.93 ± 0.34 mm). Conclusions: L and OS meet accuracy requirements in the midface and anterior skull base. OS is superior to L with navigation accuracies comparable to marker registration. However, neither method meets the high precision requirements for lateral skull base surgery. Laryngoscope, 2010</description><identifier>ISSN: 0023-852X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1531-4995</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/lary.20867</identifier><identifier>PMID: 20422680</identifier><identifier>CODEN: LARYA8</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Computer-Aided Design ; Computer-aided surgery ; Humans ; Image Processing, Computer-Assisted ; Imaging, Three-Dimensional ; Level of Evidence: 2b ; Medical sciences ; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures - methods ; Models, Anatomic ; navigation accuracy ; Neuronavigation - instrumentation ; Neuronavigation - methods ; Otorhinolaryngologic Diseases - diagnostic imaging ; Otorhinolaryngologic Diseases - surgery ; Otorhinolaryngology. Stomatology ; registration ; Skull Base - surgery ; skull models ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed</subject><ispartof>The Laryngoscope, 2010-05, Vol.120 (5), p.881-888</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2010 The American Laryngological, Rhinological, and Otological Society, Inc.</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4987-7300f461020e5e150f0e6cf3bab7651d653366e266881d19557410212c4c4e933</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4987-7300f461020e5e150f0e6cf3bab7651d653366e266881d19557410212c4c4e933</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Flary.20867$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Flary.20867$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27903,27904,45553,45554</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=22798059$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20422680$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Grauvogel, Tanja D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soteriou, Eric</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Metzger, Marc C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berlis, Ansgar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maier, Wolfgang</creatorcontrib><title>Influence of different registration modalities on navigation accuracy in ear, nose, and throat surgery depending on the surgical field</title><title>The Laryngoscope</title><addtitle>The Laryngoscope</addtitle><description>Objectives/Hypothesis: Various invasive and noninvasive registration methods have been established in the past for intraoperative navigation. The present study compared the registration and navigation accuracy of three different registration modalities in anatomical locations of special interest for ear, nose, and throat surgery. Study Design: Prospective experimental phantom study. Methods: Four skull models were individually fabricated with a three‐dimensional printer based on the patient's computed tomography data sets and fitted with an individual customized silicone skin. Three different registration modalities were examined: 1) invasive marker (IM), 2) oral splint (OS), and 3) laser scan (L). Accuracy measurements were assessed by targeting 26 titanium screws placed over the skull. The overall accuracy and the target registration error for eight selected anatomical locations were measured. Results: Mean accuracy was 0.67 ± 0.1 mm (quadratic mean ± standard deviation) for IM, 0.98 ± 0.16 mm for OS, and 1.3 ± 0.12 mm for L. The greatest differences in accuracy were found on the mastoid with best accuracy for IM (0.59 ± 0.2 mm; P &lt; .05 vs. OS and L), followed by OS (1.23 ± 0.41 mm; P &lt; .05 vs. L), and L (1.88 ± 0.45 mm). In contrast, only small differences in accuracy were detected in the anterior skull base between the registration modalities (IM 0.75 ± 0.21 mm, OS 0.71 ± 0.27 mm, L 0.93 ± 0.34 mm). Conclusions: L and OS meet accuracy requirements in the midface and anterior skull base. OS is superior to L with navigation accuracies comparable to marker registration. However, neither method meets the high precision requirements for lateral skull base surgery. Laryngoscope, 2010</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Computer-Aided Design</subject><subject>Computer-aided surgery</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Image Processing, Computer-Assisted</subject><subject>Imaging, Three-Dimensional</subject><subject>Level of Evidence: 2b</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures - methods</subject><subject>Models, Anatomic</subject><subject>navigation accuracy</subject><subject>Neuronavigation - instrumentation</subject><subject>Neuronavigation - methods</subject><subject>Otorhinolaryngologic Diseases - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Otorhinolaryngologic Diseases - surgery</subject><subject>Otorhinolaryngology. Stomatology</subject><subject>registration</subject><subject>Skull Base - surgery</subject><subject>skull models</subject><subject>Tomography, X-Ray Computed</subject><issn>0023-852X</issn><issn>1531-4995</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kctuEzEUhi0EoqGw4QGQN6gS6hRfxvbMsqpoWjXiJhCwshzPcWpwPMGegeYFeG6cTlp2rCzr_85_5M8IPafkhBLCXgeTtieMNFI9QDMqOK3qthUP0ayEvGoE-3qAnuT8nRCquCCP0QEjNWOyITP05zK6MEK0gHuHO-8cJIgDTrDyeUhm8H3E674zwQ8eMi63aH751RQYa8dk7Bb7iMGkYxz7DMfYxA4P16k3A85jWkHa4g42EDsfV7uG4RpuA29NwM5D6J6iR86EDM_25yH6fP7m09lFtXg3vzw7XVS2bhtVKU6IqyUljIAAKogjIK3jS7NUUtBOCs6lBCZl09COtkKousCU2drW0HJ-iI6m3k3qf46QB7322UIIJkI_Zq04F0y0pC7kq4m0qc85gdOb5NfFtKZE77TrnXZ9q73AL_a143IN3T1657kAL_eAyeXRLploff7HMdU2RLSFoxP32wfY_melXpx-_Ha3vJpmyofBzf2MST90SZXQX97OtfpwdT6_at7rBf8LiTiqQQ</recordid><startdate>201005</startdate><enddate>201005</enddate><creator>Grauvogel, Tanja D.</creator><creator>Soteriou, Eric</creator><creator>Metzger, Marc C.</creator><creator>Berlis, Ansgar</creator><creator>Maier, Wolfgang</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</general><general>Wiley-Blackwell</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201005</creationdate><title>Influence of different registration modalities on navigation accuracy in ear, nose, and throat surgery depending on the surgical field</title><author>Grauvogel, Tanja D. ; Soteriou, Eric ; Metzger, Marc C. ; Berlis, Ansgar ; Maier, Wolfgang</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4987-7300f461020e5e150f0e6cf3bab7651d653366e266881d19557410212c4c4e933</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Computer-Aided Design</topic><topic>Computer-aided surgery</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Image Processing, Computer-Assisted</topic><topic>Imaging, Three-Dimensional</topic><topic>Level of Evidence: 2b</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures - methods</topic><topic>Models, Anatomic</topic><topic>navigation accuracy</topic><topic>Neuronavigation - instrumentation</topic><topic>Neuronavigation - methods</topic><topic>Otorhinolaryngologic Diseases - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Otorhinolaryngologic Diseases - surgery</topic><topic>Otorhinolaryngology. Stomatology</topic><topic>registration</topic><topic>Skull Base - surgery</topic><topic>skull models</topic><topic>Tomography, X-Ray Computed</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Grauvogel, Tanja D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soteriou, Eric</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Metzger, Marc C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berlis, Ansgar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maier, Wolfgang</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Laryngoscope</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Grauvogel, Tanja D.</au><au>Soteriou, Eric</au><au>Metzger, Marc C.</au><au>Berlis, Ansgar</au><au>Maier, Wolfgang</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Influence of different registration modalities on navigation accuracy in ear, nose, and throat surgery depending on the surgical field</atitle><jtitle>The Laryngoscope</jtitle><addtitle>The Laryngoscope</addtitle><date>2010-05</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>120</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>881</spage><epage>888</epage><pages>881-888</pages><issn>0023-852X</issn><eissn>1531-4995</eissn><coden>LARYA8</coden><abstract>Objectives/Hypothesis: Various invasive and noninvasive registration methods have been established in the past for intraoperative navigation. The present study compared the registration and navigation accuracy of three different registration modalities in anatomical locations of special interest for ear, nose, and throat surgery. Study Design: Prospective experimental phantom study. Methods: Four skull models were individually fabricated with a three‐dimensional printer based on the patient's computed tomography data sets and fitted with an individual customized silicone skin. Three different registration modalities were examined: 1) invasive marker (IM), 2) oral splint (OS), and 3) laser scan (L). Accuracy measurements were assessed by targeting 26 titanium screws placed over the skull. The overall accuracy and the target registration error for eight selected anatomical locations were measured. Results: Mean accuracy was 0.67 ± 0.1 mm (quadratic mean ± standard deviation) for IM, 0.98 ± 0.16 mm for OS, and 1.3 ± 0.12 mm for L. The greatest differences in accuracy were found on the mastoid with best accuracy for IM (0.59 ± 0.2 mm; P &lt; .05 vs. OS and L), followed by OS (1.23 ± 0.41 mm; P &lt; .05 vs. L), and L (1.88 ± 0.45 mm). In contrast, only small differences in accuracy were detected in the anterior skull base between the registration modalities (IM 0.75 ± 0.21 mm, OS 0.71 ± 0.27 mm, L 0.93 ± 0.34 mm). Conclusions: L and OS meet accuracy requirements in the midface and anterior skull base. OS is superior to L with navigation accuracies comparable to marker registration. However, neither method meets the high precision requirements for lateral skull base surgery. Laryngoscope, 2010</abstract><cop>Hoboken</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</pub><pmid>20422680</pmid><doi>10.1002/lary.20867</doi><tpages>8</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0023-852X
ispartof The Laryngoscope, 2010-05, Vol.120 (5), p.881-888
issn 0023-852X
1531-4995
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_733525904
source MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
subjects Biological and medical sciences
Computer-Aided Design
Computer-aided surgery
Humans
Image Processing, Computer-Assisted
Imaging, Three-Dimensional
Level of Evidence: 2b
Medical sciences
Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures - methods
Models, Anatomic
navigation accuracy
Neuronavigation - instrumentation
Neuronavigation - methods
Otorhinolaryngologic Diseases - diagnostic imaging
Otorhinolaryngologic Diseases - surgery
Otorhinolaryngology. Stomatology
registration
Skull Base - surgery
skull models
Tomography, X-Ray Computed
title Influence of different registration modalities on navigation accuracy in ear, nose, and throat surgery depending on the surgical field
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-25T16%3A56%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Influence%20of%20different%20registration%20modalities%20on%20navigation%20accuracy%20in%20ear,%20nose,%20and%20throat%20surgery%20depending%20on%20the%20surgical%20field&rft.jtitle=The%20Laryngoscope&rft.au=Grauvogel,%20Tanja%20D.&rft.date=2010-05&rft.volume=120&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=881&rft.epage=888&rft.pages=881-888&rft.issn=0023-852X&rft.eissn=1531-4995&rft.coden=LARYA8&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/lary.20867&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E733525904%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=733525904&rft_id=info:pmid/20422680&rfr_iscdi=true