Application of Real-Time 3D Navigation System in CT-Guided Percutaneous Interventional Procedures: A Feasibility Study

Bhattacharji, Priya; Moore, William

doi:10.1155/2017/3151694

Cited by 10 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The average needle placement accuracy in the liver phantom was 2.0 ± 0.7 mm – 2.8 ± 1.1 mm and 3.0 ± 1.4 mm in the lung. In the clinical setting, the accuracy was 4.6 ± 3.1 for all procedures [ 20 ]. Mbalisike et al evaluated a robotic system (MAXIO, Perfint Healthcare, Indiana, USA) for applicator placement in MWA on patient that had been treated with trans-arterial chemoembolization (TACE) within 3 months prior to MWA.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy of Electrode Placement in IRE Treatment with Navigated Guidance

Stillström

Sandu

Freedman

2021

Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Evaluate the accuracy of multiple electrode placements in IRE treatment of liver tumours using a stereotactic CT-based navigation system. Method Analysing data from all IRE treatments of liver tumours at one institution until 31 December 2018. Comparing planned with validated electrode placement. Analysing lateral and angular errors and parallelism between electrode pairs Results Eighty-four tumours were treated in 60 patients. Forty-six per cent were hepatocellular carcinoma, and 36% were colorectal liver metastases. The tumours were located in all segments of the liver. Data were complete from 51 treatments. Two hundred and six electrodes and 336 electrode pairs were analysed. The median lateral and angular error, comparing planned and validated electrode placement, was 3.6 mm (range 0.2–13.6 mm) and 3.1° (range 0°–16.1°). All electrodes with a lateral error >10 mm were either re-positioned or excluded before treatment. The median angle between the electrode pairs was 3.8° (range 0.3°–17.2°). There were no electrode placement-related complications. Conclusion The use of a stereotactic CT-based system for navigation of electrode placement in IRE treatment of liver tumours is safe, accurate and user friendly.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy of Electrode Placement in IRE Treatment with Navigated Guidance

Stillström

Sandu

Freedman

2021

Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous publications have shown that the use of a stereotactic CT-based navigation systems in placing applicators for MWA and RFA is safe and accurate 6 , 7 , 10 – 12 . Furthermore, several studies have shown the use of stereotactic navigation in IRE treatment with good results 13 – 15 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stereotactic navigation versus ultrasound guidance in placing IRE applicators in a liver phantom

Stillström

Eigl²,

Freedman

2021

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of stereotactic CT-guided navigation and ultrasound guided navigation for placing electrodes in Irreversible electroporation in a liver phantom. A liver phantom with multiple tumours was used and interventionists placed four IRE electrodes around each tumour guided either by stereotactic CT-guided navigation or ultrasound. The goal was to place them in a perfect 20 × 20 mm square with parallel electrodes. After each treatment, a CT-scan was performed. The accuracy in pairwise electrode distance, pairwise parallelism and time per tumour was analysed. Eight interventionists placed four electrodes around 55 tumours, 25 with ultrasound and 30 with stereotactic CT-guided navigation. 330 electrode pairs were analysed, 150 with ultrasound and 180 with stereotactic CT-navigation. The absolute median deviation from the optimal distance was 1.3 mm (range 0.0 to 11.3 mm) in the stereotactic CT-navigation group versus 7.1 mm (range 0.3 to 18.1 mm) in the Ultrasound group (p < 0.001). The mean angle between electrodes in each pair was 2.7 degrees (95% CI 2.4 to 3.1 degrees) in the stereotactic CT-navigation group and 5.5 degrees (95% CI 5.0 to 6.1 degrees) in the Ultrasound group (p < 0.001). The mean time for placing the electrodes was 15:11 min (95% CI 13:05 to 17:18 min) in the stereotactic CT-navigation group and 6:40 min (95% CI 5:28 to 7:52 min) in the Ultrasound group. The use of stereotactic CT-navigation in placing IRE-electrodes in a liver phantom is more accurate, but more time consuming, compared to ultrasound guidance.

show abstract

“…Navigation systems have been used in neurosurgery and orthopaedic surgery[43,44]. In liver oncologic surgery the navigation solutions seem to have a reliable implication in interventional liver radiology[45,46]. In open and laparoscopic liver surgery the navigation systems are based in the combination of preoperative imaging, IUS and tracking systems with sophisticated intraoperative instrumentation (Figure 5)[3,35,47].…”

Section: Navigation Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Up-to-date intraoperative computer assisted solutions for liver surgery

Zygomalas

Kehagias

2019

WJGS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Computer assisted surgical planning allowed for a better selection of patients, evaluation of operative strategy, appropriate volumetric measurements, identification of anatomical risks, definition of tumour resection margins and choice of surgical approach in liver oncologic resections and living donor liver transplantations. Although preoperative computer surgical analysis has been widely used in daily clinical practice, intraoperative computer assisted solutions for risk analysis and navigation in liver surgery are not widely available or still under clinical evaluation. Computer science technology can efficiently assist modern surgeons during complex liver operations, mainly by providing image guidance with individualized 2D images and 3D models of the various anatomical and pathological structures of interest. Intraoperative computer assisted liver surgery is particularly useful in complex parenchyma-sparing hepatectomies, for intraoperative risk analysis and for the effective treatment of colorectal metastases after neoadjuvant therapy or when they are multiple. In laparoscopic liver surgery, intraoperative computer aid is definitively more important as, apart from a restricted field of view, there is also loss of the fine haptic feedback. Intraoperative computer assisted developments face challenges that prevent their application in daily clinical practice. There is a vast variety of studies regarding intraoperative computer assisted liver surgery but there are no clear objective measurements in order to compare them and select the most effective solutions. An overview of up-to-date intraoperative computer assisted solutions for liver surgery will be discussed.

show abstract

Application of Real-Time 3D Navigation System in CT-Guided Percutaneous Interventional Procedures: A Feasibility Study

Cited by 10 publications

References 24 publications

Accuracy of Electrode Placement in IRE Treatment with Navigated Guidance

Accuracy of Electrode Placement in IRE Treatment with Navigated Guidance

Stereotactic navigation versus ultrasound guidance in placing IRE applicators in a liver phantom

Up-to-date intraoperative computer assisted solutions for liver surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About