There are many different types of errors in neuronavigation, and the reasons and results of these errors are complex. For a neurosurgeon using the neuronavigation system, it is important to have a clear understanding of when an error may occur, what the magnitude of it is, and how to avoid it or reduce its influence on the final application accuracy. In this article, we classify all the errors into 2 groups according to the working principle of neuronavigation systems. The first group contains the errors caused by the differences between the anatomic structures in the images and that of the real patient, and the second group contains the errors occurring in transforming the position of surgical tools from the patient space to the image space. Each group is further divided into 2 subgroups. We discuss 16 types of errors and classify each of them into one of the subgroups. The classification and analysis of these errors should help neurosurgeons understand the power and limits of neuronavigation systems and use them more properly.

Objective: Surface matching is a relatively new method of spatial registration in neuronavigation. Compared to the traditional point matching method, surface matching does not use fiducial markers that must be fixed to the surface of the head before image scanning, and therefore does not require an image acquisition specifically dedicated for navigation purposes. However, surface matching is not widely used clinically, mainly because there is still insufficient knowledge about its application accuracy. This study aimed to explore the properties of the Target Registration Error (TRE) of surface matching in neuronavigation. Materials and Methods: The surface matching process was simulated in the image space of a neuronavigation system so that the TRE could be calculated at any point in that space. For each registration, two point clouds were generated to represent the surface extracted from preoperative images (PC image ) and the surface obtained intraoperatively by laser scanning (PC laser ). The properties of the TRE were studied by performing multiple registrations with PC laser point clouds at different positions and generated by adding different types of error. Results: For each registration, the TRE had a minimal value at a point in the image space, and the iso-valued surface of the TRE was approximately ellipsoid with smaller TRE on the inner surfaces. The position of the point with minimal TRE and the shape of the iso-valued surface were highly random across different registrations, and the surface registration error between the two point clouds was irrelevant to the TRE at a specific point. The overall TRE tended to increase with the increase in errors in PC laser , and a larger PC laser made it less sensitive to these errors. With the introduction of errors in PC laser , the points with minimal TRE tended to be concentrated in the anterior and inferior part of the head. Conclusion:The results indicate that the alignment between the two surfaces could not provide reliable information about the registration accuracy at an arbitrary target point. However, according to the spatial distribution of the target registration error of a single registration, enough application accuracy could be guaranteed by proper visual verification after registration. In addition, surface matching tends to achieve high accuracy in the inferior and anterior part of the head, and a relatively large scanning area is preferable.