Comparing Fiducial-Based and Intraoperative Computed Tomography-Based Registration for Frameless Stereotactic Brain Biopsy.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this work was to compare fiducial-based and intraoperative computed tomography (iCT)-based registration for frameless stereotactic brain biopsy. METHODS: Of 50 frameless stereotactic biopsies with the VarioGuide, 30 cases were registered as iCT based and 20 as fiducial based. Statistical analysis of the target registration error (TRE), dose length product, effective radiation dose (ED), operation time, and diagnostic yield was performed. RESULTS: The mean TRE was significantly lower using iCT-based registration (mean ± SD: 0.70 ± 0.32 vs. 2.43 ± 0.73 mm, p < 0.0001). The ED was significantly lower when using iCT-based registration compared to standard navigational CT (mean ± SD: 0.10 ± 0.13 vs. 2.23 ± 0.34 mSv, p < 0.0001). Post-biopsy iCT was associated with a significant lower (p < 0.0001) ED compared to standard CT (mean ± SD: 1.04 ± 0.18 vs. 1.65 ± 0.26 mSv). The mean surgical time was shorter using iCT-based registration, although the mean total operating room (OR) time did not differ significantly. The diagnostic yield was 96.7% (iCT group) versus 95% (fiducial group). Post-biopsy imaging revealed severe bleeding in 3.3% (iCT group) versus 5% (fiducial group). CONCLUSION: iCT-based registration for frameless stereotactic biopsies increases the accuracy significantly without negative effects on the surgical time or the overall time in the OR. Appropriate scan protocols in iCT registration contribute to a significant reduction of the radiation exposure. The high accuracy of the iCT makes it the more favorable registration strategy when taking biopsies of small tumors or lesions near eloquent brain areas.

Fiducial-based fusion of 3D dental models with magnetic resonance imaging.

PURPOSE: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is widely used in study of maxillofacial structures. While MRI is the modality of choice for soft tissues, it fails to capture hard tissues such as bone and teeth. Virtual dental models, acquired by optical 3D scanners, are becoming more accessible for dental practice and are starting to replace the conventional dental impressions. The goal of this research is to fuse the high-resolution 3D dental models with MRI to enhance the value of imaging for applications where detailed analysis of maxillofacial structures are needed such as patient examination, surgical planning, and modeling. METHODS: A subject-specific dental attachment was digitally designed and 3D printed based on the subject's face width and dental anatomy. The attachment contained 19 semi-ellipsoidal concavities in predetermined positions where oil-based ellipsoidal fiducial markers were later placed. The MRI was acquired while the subject bit on the dental attachment. The spatial position of the center of mass of each fiducial in the resultant MR Image was calculated by averaging its voxels' spatial coordinates. The rigid transformation to fuse dental models to MRI was calculated based on the least squares mapping of corresponding fiducials and solved via singular-value decomposition. RESULTS: The target registration error (TRE) of the proposed fusion process, calculated in a leave-one-fiducial-out fashion, was estimated at 0.49 mm. The results suggest that 6-9 fiducials suffice to achieve a TRE of equal to half the MRI voxel size. CONCLUSION: Ellipsoidal oil-based fiducials produce distinguishable intensities in MRI and can be used as registration fiducials. The achieved accuracy of the proposed approach is sufficient to leverage the merged 3D dental models with the MRI data for a finer analysis of the maxillofacial structures where complete geometry models are needed.

Intraoperative fiducial-less patient registration using volumetric 3D ultrasound: a prospective series of 32 neurosurgical cases.

OBJECT: Fiducial-based registration (FBR) is used widely for patient registration in image-guided neurosurgery. The authors of this study have developed an automatic fiducial-less registration (FLR) technique to find the patient-to-image transformation by directly registering 3D ultrasound (3DUS) with MR images without incorporating prior information. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the performance of the FLR technique when used prospectively in the operating room and to compare it with conventional FBR. METHODS: In 32 surgical patients who underwent conventional FBR, preoperative T1-weighted MR images (pMR) with attached fiducial markers were acquired prior to surgery. After craniotomy but before dural opening, a set of 3DUS images of the brain volume was acquired. A 2-step registration process was executed immediately after image acquisition: 1) the cortical surfaces from pMR and 3DUS were segmented, and a multistart sum-of-squared-intensity-difference registration was executed to find an initial alignment between down-sampled binary pMR and 3DUS volumes; and 2) the alignment was further refined by a mutual information-based registration between full-resolution grayscale pMR and 3DUS images, and a patient-to-image transformation was subsequently extracted. RESULTS: To assess the accuracy of the FLR technique, the following were quantified: 1) the fiducial distance error (FDE); and 2) the target registration error (TRE) at anterior commissure and posterior commissure locations; these were compared with conventional FBR. The results showed that although the average FDE (6.42 ± 2.05 mm) was higher than the fiducial registration error (FRE) from FBR (3.42 ± 1.37 mm), the overall TRE of FLR (2.51 ± 0.93 mm) was lower than that of FBR (5.48 ± 1.81 mm). The results agreed with the intent of the 2 registration techniques: FBR is designed to minimize the FRE, whereas FLR is designed to optimize feature alignment and hence minimize TRE. The overall computational cost of FLR was approximately 4-5 minutes and minimal user interaction was required. CONCLUSIONS: Because the FLR method directly registers 3DUS with MR by matching internal image features, it proved to be more accurate than FBR in terms of TRE in the 32 patients evaluated in this study. The overall efficiency of FLR in terms of the time and personnel involved is also improved relative to FBR in the operating room, and the method does not require additional image scans immediately prior to surgery. The performance of FLR and these results suggest potential for broad clinical application.