Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
A Comparative Study of Fiducial-Based and Fiducial-Less Registration Utilizing the O-Arm.
Toms, Jamie; Martin, Sheyne; Sima, Adam P; Chung, Augustine; Docef, Alen; Holloway, Kathryn L.
  • Toms J; Department of Neurosurgery, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, USA.
  • Martin S; The Southeast Parkinson's Disease Research, Education, and Care Center, Hunter Holmes McGuire Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Richmond, Virginia, USA.
  • Sima AP; The Southeast Parkinson's Disease Research, Education, and Care Center, Hunter Holmes McGuire Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Richmond, Virginia, USA.
  • Chung A; Department of Biostatistics, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, USA.
  • Docef A; Department of Neurosurgery, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, USA.
  • Holloway KL; Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, USA.
Stereotact Funct Neurosurg ; 97(2): 83-93, 2019.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31085935
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Frameless stereotactic surgery utilizing fiducial-based (FB) registration is an established tool in the armamentarium of deep brain stimulation (DBS) surgeons. Fiducial-less (FL) registration via intraoperative CT, such as the O-arm, has been routinely used in spine surgery, but its accuracy for DBS surgery has not been studied in a clinical setting.

OBJECTIVE:

We undertook a study to analyze the accuracy of the FL technique in DBS surgery and compare it to the FB method.

METHODS:

In this prospective cohort study, 97 patients underwent DBS surgery using the NexFrame and the O-arm registration stereotactic system. Patients underwent FB (n = 50) registration from 2015 to 2016 and FL (n = 47) O-arm registration from 2016 to 2017.

RESULTS:

The radial errors (RE) and vector/euclidean errors of FB and FL registration were not significantly different. There was no difference in additional passes between methods, but there was an increase in the number of RE ≥2.5 mm in the FL method.

CONCLUSION:

Although there was no statistically significant difference in RE or the need for additional passes, the increased number of errors ≥2.5 mm with the FL method (17 vs. 4% in FB) indicates the need for further study. We concluded that O-arm images of the implants should be utilized to assess and correct for this error.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Técnicas Estereotáxicas / Cirugía Asistida por Computador / Estimulación Encefálica Profunda / Marcadores Fiduciales Tipo de estudio: Etiology_studies / Incidence_studies / Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Límite: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Año: 2019 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Técnicas Estereotáxicas / Cirugía Asistida por Computador / Estimulación Encefálica Profunda / Marcadores Fiduciales Tipo de estudio: Etiology_studies / Incidence_studies / Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Límite: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Año: 2019 Tipo del documento: Article