Automatic path proposal computation for CT-guided percutaneous liver biopsy
- 187 Downloads
To evaluate feasibility of automatic software-based path proposals for CT-guided percutaneous biopsies.
Thirty-three patients (60 \(\pm \) 12 years) referred for CT-guided biopsy of focal liver lesions were consecutively included. Pre-interventional CT and dedicated software (FraunhoferMeVis Pathfinder) were used for (semi)automatic segmentation of relevant structures. The software subsequently generated three path proposals in downward quality for CT-guided biopsy. Proposed needle paths were compared with consensus proposal of two experts (comparable, less suitable, not feasible). In case of comparable results, equivalent approach to software-based path proposal was used. Quality of segmentation process was evaluated (Likert scale, 1 \(=\) best, 6 \(=\) worst), and time for processing was registered.
All biopsies were performed successfully without complications. In 91 % one of the three automatic path proposals was rated comparable to experts’ proposal. None of the first proposals was rated not feasible, and 76 % were rated comparable to the experts’ proposal. 7 % automatic path proposals were rated not feasible, all being second choice (\(n=1\)) or third choice (\(n=6\)). In 79 %, segmentation at least was good. Average total time for establishing automatic path proposal was 42 \(\pm \) 9 s.
Automatic software-based path proposal for CT-guided liver biopsies in the majority provides path proposals that are easy to establish and comparable to experts’ insertion trajectories.
The work was partially funded by a Grant of Siemens AG Healthcare Sector Imaging and IT Division Computed Tomography, Forchheim.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The following authors of this manuscript declare relationships with the following companies: Christian Schumann is employed by Fraunhofer MEVIS, Institute for Medical Image Computing, Bremen, Germany. Matthias Niethammer is employed by Siemens AG Healthcare, Forchheim, Germany. Jennifer Aumann is employed by we-do-IT, Melbourne, Australia The remaining authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 2.Steil S, Zerwas S, Moos G, Bittinger F, Hansen T, Mergenthaler U, Weide R (2009) CT-guided percutaneous core needle biopsy in oncology outpatients: sensitivity, specificity, complications. Onkologie 32:254–258Google Scholar
- 9.Baegert C, Villard C, Schreck P, Soler L (2007) Multi-criteria trajectory planning for hepatic radiofrequency ablation. Med Image Comput Assist Interv 10:676–684Google Scholar
- 13.Schumann C, Bieberstein J, Trumm C, Schmidt D, Bruners P, Niethammer M, Hoffmann RT, Mahnken AH, Pereira PL, Peitgen H-O Fast automatic path proposal computation for hepatic needle placement. In: SPIE 7625, Medical imaging 2010: visualization, image-guided procedures, and modeling, 76251JGoogle Scholar
- 15.Maier-Hein L, Tekbas A, Seitel A, Pianka F, Müller SA, Satzl S, Schawo S, Radeleff B, Tetzlaff R, Franz AM, Müller-Stich BP, Wolf I, Kauczor HU, Schmied BM, Meinzer HP (2008) In vivo accuracy assessment of a needle-based navigation system for CT-guided radiofrequency ablation of the liver. Med Phys. 35(12):5385–5396CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar