Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Is there an equivalence of non-invasive to invasive referenciation in computer-aided surgery?

  • Miscellaneous
  • Published:
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Various navigation systems with non-invasive patient referenciation and registration methods have been developed in times of minimal-invasive and computer-aided surgery. However, hard data proving the equivalence of different referenciation systems are missing. The present study investigated invasive and non-invasive referenciation systems with regard to overall navigation accuracy as well as navigation accuracy at specific anatomic locations. Four skull models were individually fabricated with a 3D printer based on patient’s CT data sets and fitted with an individual customized silicone skin. 26 titanium screws on defined anatomic locations served as target fiducials. Two non-invasive referenciation systems (headband and headset) were compared with the invasive skull fixed reference array. Registration was done with laser surface scan. The mean accuracy was calculated and the target registration error for eight anatomical locations was measured. Mean accuracy was 1.3 ± 0.12 mm for the skull fixed reference array, 1.44 ± 0.24 mm for the headset and 1.46 ± 0.15 mm for the headband referenciation (non-significant). Navigation accuracy of the invasive referenciation system was significantly superior to the accuracy of both non-invasive systems on the ethmoid sinus with respect to the selected anatomic locations. In the midface headband referenciation was statistically significantly worse than the invasive system. Invasive and non-invasive referenciation systems seem to be on par in terms of overall navigation accuracy, but not regarding specific anatomic locations. Therefore, invasive referenciation systems should be preferred in high precision surgery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Wise SK, DelGaudio JM (2005) Computer-aided surgery of the paranasal sinuses and skull base. Expert Rev Med Devices 2(4):395–408

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Caversaccio M, Nolte LP, Hausler R (2002) Present state and future perspectives of computer aided surgery in the field of ENT and skull base. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Belg 56(1):51–59

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Schlaier J, Warnat J, Brawanski A (2002) Registration accuracy and practicability of laser-directed surface matching. Comput Aided Surg 7(5):284–290

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Raabe A, Krishnan R, Wolff R, Hermann E, Zimmermann M, Seifert V (2002) Laser surface scanning for patient registration in intracranial image-guided surgery. Neurosurgery 50(4):797–801 (discussion 802–793)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Citardi MJ, Batra PS (2007) Intraoperative surgical navigation for endoscopic sinus surgery: rationale and indications. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 15(1):23–27

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Eggers G, Muhling J (2007) Template-based registration for image-guided skull base surgery. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 136(6):907–913

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Labadie RF, Shah RJ, Harris SS, Cetinkaya E, Haynes DS, Fenlon MR, Juszczyk AS, Galloway RL, Fitzpatrick JM (2005) In vitro assessment of image-guided otologic surgery: submillimeter accuracy within the region of the temporal bone. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 132(3):435–442

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ledderose GJ, Stelter K, Leunig A, Hagedorn H (2007) Surface laser registration in ENT-surgery: accuracy in the paranasal sinuses—a cadaveric study. Rhinology 45(4):281–285

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Metzger MC, Rafii A, Holhweg-Majert B, Pham AM, Strong B (2007) Comparison of 4 registration strategies for computer-aided maxillofacial surgery. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 137(1):93–99

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Schicho K, Figl M, Seemann R, Donat M, Pretterklieber ML, Birkfellner W, Reichwein A, Wanschitz F, Kainberger F, Bergmann H, Wagner A, Ewers R (2007) Comparison of laser surface scanning and fiducial marker-based registration in frameless stereotaxy. Technical note. J Neurosurg 106(4):704–709

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Cartellieri M, Vorbeck F (2000) Endoscopic sinus surgery using intraoperative computed tomography imaging for updating a three-dimensional navigation system. Laryngoscope 110(2 Pt 1):292–296

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Greenfield JP, Howard BM, Huang C, Boockvar JA (2008) Endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal surgery using a skull reference array and laser surface scanning. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 51(4):244–246

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Ecke U, Maurer J, Boor S, Khan M, Mann WJ (2003) Common errors of intraoperative navigation in lateral skull base surgery. HNO 51(5):386–393

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Widmann G, Stoffner R, Bale R (2009) Errors and error management in image-guided craniomaxillofacial surgery. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 107(5):701–715

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Gunkel AR, Thumfart WF, Freysinger W (2000) Computer-aided 3D-navigation systems. Survey and location determination. HNO 48(2):75–90

  16. Caversaccio, Freysinger (2003) Computer assistance for intraoperative navigation in ENT surgery. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 12(1):36–51

    Google Scholar 

  17. Grauvogel TD, Soteriou E, Metzger MC, Berlis A, Maier W (2010) Influence of different registration modalities on navigation accuracy in ear, nose, and throat surgery depending on the surgical field. Laryngoscope 120(5):881–888

    Google Scholar 

  18. Knott PD, Batra PS, Butler RS, Citardi MJ (2006) Contour and paired-point registration in a model for image-guided surgery. Laryngoscope 116(10):1877–1881

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Mascott CR, Sol JC, Bousquet P, Lagarrigue J, Lazorthes Y, Lauwers-Cances V (2006) Quantification of true in vivo (application) accuracy in cranial image-guided surgery: influence of mode of patient registration. Neurosurgery 59(1 Suppl 1):ONS146–156 (discussion ONS146–156)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Grevers G, Leunig A, Klemens A, Hagedorn H (2002) CAS of the paranasal sinuses—technology and clinical experience with the Vector-Vision-Compact-System in 102 patients. Laryngorhinootologie 81(7):476–483

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Luebbers HT, Messmer P, Obwegeser JA, Zwahlen RA, Kikinis R, Graetz KW, Matthews F (2008) Comparison of different registration methods for surgical navigation in cranio-maxillofacial surgery. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 36(2):109–116

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Troitzsch D, Hoffmann J, Dammann F, Bartz D, Reinert S (2003) Registration using three-dimensional laser surface scanning for navigation in oral and craniomaxillofacial surgery. Zentralbl Chir 128(7):551–556

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Marmulla R, Eggers G, Muhling J (2005) Laser surface registration for lateral skull base surgery. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 48(3):181–185

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Javer AR, Kuhn FA, Smith D (2000) Stereotactic computer-assisted navigational sinus surgery: accuracy of an electromagnetic tracking system with the tissue debrider and when utilizing different headsets for the same patient. Am J Rhinol 14(6):361–365

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Ecke U, Luebben B, Maurer J, Boor S, Mann WJ (2003) Comparison of different computer-aided surgery systems in skull base surgery. Skull Base 13(1):43–50

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Balachandran R, Fitzpatrick JM, Labadie RF (2008) Accuracy of image-guided surgical systems at the lateral skull base as clinically assessed using bone-anchored hearing aid posts as surgical targets. Otol Neurotol 29(8):1050–1055

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Professor Dr. J. Schulte-Moenting from the Institute of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, University of Freiburg, Germany for his support in statistical analysis and Ms I. Neu, make-up artist at the theatre of Freiburg, Germany for fabricating the silicone masks. This work was supported by the Faculty of Medicine, Albert-Ludwigs-University of Freiburg, Germany.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Albert-Ludwigs-University Medical School, Killianstr. 5, 79106, Freiburg, Germany

    Tanja D. Grauvogel, Susan Arndt & Wolfgang Maier

  2. Department of Neurosurgery, Albert-Ludwigs-University Medical School, Freiburg, Germany

    Juergen Grauvogel

  3. Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Neuroradiology, Medical School Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany

    Ansgar Berlis

Authors
  1. Tanja D. Grauvogel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Juergen Grauvogel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Susan Arndt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ansgar Berlis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Wolfgang Maier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tanja D. Grauvogel.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Grauvogel, T.D., Grauvogel, J., Arndt, S. et al. Is there an equivalence of non-invasive to invasive referenciation in computer-aided surgery?. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 269, 2285–2290 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-012-2023-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-012-2023-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation