Dataset Information

Evaluation of 3D ultrasound for image guidance.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

In this paper we compared two different 3D ultrasound (US) modes (3D free-hand mode and 3D wobbler mode) to see which is more suitable to perform the 3D-US/3D-US registration for clinical guidance applications. The typical errors with respect to their impact on the final localization error were evaluated step by step.

Methods

Multi-point target and Hand-eye calibration methods were used for 3D US calibration together with a newly designed multi-cone phantom. Pointer based and image based methods were used for 2D US calibration. The calibration target error was computed by using a different multi-cone phantom. An egg-shaped phantom was used as ground truth to compare distortions for both 3D modes along with the measurements of the volume. Finally, we compared 3D ultrasound images acquired by 3D wobbler mode and 3D free-hand mode with respect to their 3D-US/3D-US registration accuracy using both, phantom and patient data. A theoretical step by step error analysis was performed and compared to empirical data.

Results

Target registration errors based on the calibration with the 3D Multi-point and 2D pointer/image method have been found to be comparable (∼1mm). They both outperformed the 3D Hand-eye method (error >2mm). Volume measurements with the 3D free-hand mode were closest to the ground truth (around 6% error compared to 9% with the 3D wobbler mode). Additional scans on phantoms showed a 3D-US/3D-US registration error below 1 mm for both, the 3D free-hand mode and the 3D wobbler mode, respectively. Results with patient data showed greater error with the 3D free-hand mode (6.50mm - 13.37mm) than with the 3D wobbler mode (2.99 ± 1.54 mm). All the measured errors were found to be in accordance to their theoretical upper bounds.

Conclusion

While both 3D volume methods showed comparable results with respect to 3D-US/3D-US registration for phantom images, for patient data registrations the 3D wobbler mode is superior to the 3D free-hand mode. The effect of all error sources could be estimated by theoretical derivations.

SUBMITTER: Iommi D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7098612 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Rigorous screening and good imaging would help perform surgery on carotid artery occlusion CAO safely and effectively. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively evaluate carotid endarterectomy (CEA) recanalization in patients with common carotid artery occlusion (CCAO) or internal carotid artery occlusion (ICAO) with color Doppler flow imaging (CDFI). A total of 59 patients undergoing CEA were enrolled. According to the results of CEA, the patients were divided into successful recanalization (group A) and unsuccessful recanalization (group B) groups. The original diameter, lesion length, proximal-to-distal diameter ratio and echo characteristics of the lesion within the lumen of the carotid artery were recorded before CEA and compared between the two groups. In regards to the achievement of repatency by CEA, the overall success rate was 74.6% (44/59), the success rate in CCAO patients was 75.9% (22/29) and the success rate in ICAO patients was 73.3% (22/30). There was no significant difference in the success rates between the CCAO and ICAO patients (χ2 = 0.050, P = 0.824). The overall rate of stroke and death within 30 postoperative days was 5.1% (3/59). For the CCAO patients, the lesion length in group A was shorter than that in group B (t = 3.221, P = 0.004). For the ICAO patients, the original diameter of the distal ICA was broader (t = 6.254, P = 0.000) and the proximal-to-distal ICA diameter ratio was smaller (t = 8.036, P = 0.000) in group A than in group B. The rate of recanalization for lumens with a homogeneous echo pattern (hypoecho or isoecho) was significantly higher than that for lumens with echo heterogeneity for both the CCAO and ICAO patients (χ2 = 14.477, P = 0.001; χ2 = 10.519, P = 0.003). However, for both the CCAO and ICAO patients, there was no difference in the rate of recanalization between patients with hypoecho and isoecho lesions (χ2 = 0.109, P = 0.742; χ2 = 0.836, P = 0.429). The original diameter, proximal-to-distal ICA diameter ratio, lesion length and echo characteristics may affect the success of CEA recanalization in patients with CCAO and ICAO. CDFI is helpful in screening patients with carotid artery occlusion and may improve the success rate of CEA.