Cargando…

Segmental Surface Referencing during Intraoperative Three-dimensional Image-Guided Spine Navigation: An Early Validation with Comparison to Automated Referencing

Study Design Interventional human cadaver study. Objective Intraoperative three-dimensional (3-D)-guided navigation improves spine instrumentation accuracy. However, image acquisition may need to be repeated with segment hypermobility or distant target from reference frame (RF). The current study ev...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Al-Habib, Amro F., Al-Akkad, Salah
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2016
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5110353/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27853660
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0036-1582393
_version_ 1782467682629582848
author Al-Habib, Amro F.
Al-Akkad, Salah
author_facet Al-Habib, Amro F.
Al-Akkad, Salah
author_sort Al-Habib, Amro F.
collection PubMed
description Study Design Interventional human cadaver study. Objective Intraoperative three-dimensional (3-D)-guided navigation improves spine instrumentation accuracy. However, image acquisition may need to be repeated with segment hypermobility or distant target from reference frame (RF). The current study evaluates the usefulness of internal metal fiducials (IMFs) as surface references in enhancing registration accuracy and avoiding repeating imaging. Methods Six fresh-frozen cadaveric human torsos were utilized. Posterior C1–T2 exposure was done, and three IMFs were inserted per level; intraoperative 3-D images were then acquired. Two registration methods were utilized: autoregistration (AR, group 1) and point registration using IMF (IMFR, group 2). Registration accuracy was checked by identifying IMFs in both groups. Pedicle screws inserted into C2, C4, C5, and C7 based on the two registration methods (three cadavers each) with RF on C7 and then on C2. Results The mean registration error was lower with IMFR compared with AR (0.35 ± 0.5 mm versus 2.02 ± 0.85 mm, p = 0.0001). Overall, 34 pedicle screws were inserted (AR, 18; IMFR, 16). Final screw placement was comparable using both techniques (p = 0.58). Lateral screws violations were observed in four IMFR screws (1 to 2 mm) as compared with five in AR group (2 to 3 mm). Reregistration after moving RF to C2 was possible using surface screws in IMFR group, thus avoiding new 3-D image acquisition. Conclusion During intraoperative 3-D navigation in spine procedures, surface fiducial registration using IMF provided superior accuracy over automated registration. It allowed repeat registration without repeating radiation during long spine segment instrumentations. More studies are needed to clarify both practical and clinical application of this method.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5110353
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Georg Thieme Verlag KG
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-51103532016-12-01 Segmental Surface Referencing during Intraoperative Three-dimensional Image-Guided Spine Navigation: An Early Validation with Comparison to Automated Referencing Al-Habib, Amro F. Al-Akkad, Salah Global Spine J Study Design Interventional human cadaver study. Objective Intraoperative three-dimensional (3-D)-guided navigation improves spine instrumentation accuracy. However, image acquisition may need to be repeated with segment hypermobility or distant target from reference frame (RF). The current study evaluates the usefulness of internal metal fiducials (IMFs) as surface references in enhancing registration accuracy and avoiding repeating imaging. Methods Six fresh-frozen cadaveric human torsos were utilized. Posterior C1–T2 exposure was done, and three IMFs were inserted per level; intraoperative 3-D images were then acquired. Two registration methods were utilized: autoregistration (AR, group 1) and point registration using IMF (IMFR, group 2). Registration accuracy was checked by identifying IMFs in both groups. Pedicle screws inserted into C2, C4, C5, and C7 based on the two registration methods (three cadavers each) with RF on C7 and then on C2. Results The mean registration error was lower with IMFR compared with AR (0.35 ± 0.5 mm versus 2.02 ± 0.85 mm, p = 0.0001). Overall, 34 pedicle screws were inserted (AR, 18; IMFR, 16). Final screw placement was comparable using both techniques (p = 0.58). Lateral screws violations were observed in four IMFR screws (1 to 2 mm) as compared with five in AR group (2 to 3 mm). Reregistration after moving RF to C2 was possible using surface screws in IMFR group, thus avoiding new 3-D image acquisition. Conclusion During intraoperative 3-D navigation in spine procedures, surface fiducial registration using IMF provided superior accuracy over automated registration. It allowed repeat registration without repeating radiation during long spine segment instrumentations. More studies are needed to clarify both practical and clinical application of this method. Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2016-04-20 2016-12 /pmc/articles/PMC5110353/ /pubmed/27853660 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0036-1582393 Text en © Thieme Medical Publishers
spellingShingle Al-Habib, Amro F.
Al-Akkad, Salah
Segmental Surface Referencing during Intraoperative Three-dimensional Image-Guided Spine Navigation: An Early Validation with Comparison to Automated Referencing
title Segmental Surface Referencing during Intraoperative Three-dimensional Image-Guided Spine Navigation: An Early Validation with Comparison to Automated Referencing
title_full Segmental Surface Referencing during Intraoperative Three-dimensional Image-Guided Spine Navigation: An Early Validation with Comparison to Automated Referencing
title_fullStr Segmental Surface Referencing during Intraoperative Three-dimensional Image-Guided Spine Navigation: An Early Validation with Comparison to Automated Referencing
title_full_unstemmed Segmental Surface Referencing during Intraoperative Three-dimensional Image-Guided Spine Navigation: An Early Validation with Comparison to Automated Referencing
title_short Segmental Surface Referencing during Intraoperative Three-dimensional Image-Guided Spine Navigation: An Early Validation with Comparison to Automated Referencing
title_sort segmental surface referencing during intraoperative three-dimensional image-guided spine navigation: an early validation with comparison to automated referencing
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5110353/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27853660
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0036-1582393
work_keys_str_mv AT alhabibamrof segmentalsurfacereferencingduringintraoperativethreedimensionalimageguidedspinenavigationanearlyvalidationwithcomparisontoautomatedreferencing
AT alakkadsalah segmentalsurfacereferencingduringintraoperativethreedimensionalimageguidedspinenavigationanearlyvalidationwithcomparisontoautomatedreferencing