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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Laryngoscope 2010-05, Vol.120 (5), p.881-888 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
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 < .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</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&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 < .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</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 < .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</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 |