Evaluation of a novel, patient-mounted system for CT-guided needle navigation—an ex vivo study
To describe the features of a novel patient-mounted system for CT-guided needle navigation, the Puncture Cube System (PCS), and to evaluate the accuracy and efficiency of the PCS by (a) applying numerical simulations and (b) by conducting punctures using the system in comparison to punctures using the free-hand method (FHM).
The PCS consists of a self-adhesive cube that is attached to the patient, with multiple through-holes in the upper and lower template plate and dedicated software that, using a computer vision algorithm, recognizes the cube in a planning scan. The target in the image dataset is connected by a line, here “virtual needle,” which passes through the cube. For any chosen path of the virtual needle, the entry points for the needle into the cube are displayed by the software for the upper and lower template on-the-fly.
The possible exactness of the system was investigated by using numerical simulations. Next, 72 punctures were performed by 6 interventionists using a phantom to compare for accuracy, time requirement, and number of CT scans for punctures with the system to the FHM ex vivo (phantom study).
The theoretical precision to arrive at targets increased with the distance of the target but remained low. The mean error for targets up to 20 cm below the lower plate was computed to be well below 0.5 mm, and the worst-case error stayed below 1.3 mm.
Compared to a conventional free-hand procedure, the use of the navigation system resulted in a statistically significantly improved accuracy (3.4 mm ± 2.3 mm versus FHM 4.9 mm ± 3.2 mm) and overall lower intervention time (168 s ± 28.5 s versus FHM 200 s ± 44.8 s). Furthermore, the number of CT scans was reduced to 2.3 versus FHM 2.8).
The PCS is a promising technique to improve accuracy and reduce intervention time in CT-guided needle navigations compared to the FHM.
KeywordsComputer tomography Navigation Needle guidance
Compliance with ethical standards
No funding was received for this study.
Conflict of interest
RH and SW are shareholders of Medical Templates AG.
All procedures performed in the studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 1.Deml M, Buhr M, D Wimmer M et al (2015) CT-guided infiltration saves surgical intervention and fastens return to work compared to anatomical landmark-guided infiltration in patients with lumbosciatica. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 25:177–182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-015-1602-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Loizides A, Peer S, Plaikner M et al (2011) Ultrasound-guided injections in the lumbar spine. Med Ultrason 13(1):54–58Google Scholar
- 8.CIVCO Medical Solutions. http://www.civco.com/mmi/ultrasound/computed-tomography/needle-guide/radguide-610-1187.htm. Accessed 11 Apr 2017
- 11.Putzer D, Arco D, Schamberger B, Schanda F, Mahlknecht J, Widmann G, Schullian P, Jaschke W, Bale R (2016) Comparison of two electromagnetic navigation systems for CT-guided punctures: a phantom study (Elektromagnetische Navigationssysteme im Vergleich: CT-gezielte Punktionen an einem phantom). Rofo 188(5):470–478. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-103691 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Durand P, Moreau-Gaudry A, Silvent A-S, Frandon J, Chipon E, Médici M, Bricault I (2017) Computer assisted electromagnetic navigation improves accuracy in computed tomography guided interventions: a prospective randomized clinical trial. PLoS One 12(3):e0173751. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0173751 CrossRefGoogle Scholar