Dataset Information

Cone beam CT guidance provides superior accuracy for complex needle paths compared with CT guidance.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy of cone beam CT (CBCT) guidance and CT guidance in reaching small targets in relation to needle path complexity in a phantom. METHODS: CBCT guidance combines three-dimensional CBCT imaging with fluoroscopy overlay and needle planning software to provide real-time needle guidance. The accuracy of needle positioning, quantified as deviation from a target, was assessed for inplane, angulated and double angulated needle paths. Four interventional radiologists reached four targets along the three paths using CBCT and CT guidance. Accuracies were compared between CBCT and CT for each needle path and between the three approaches within both modalities. The effect of user experience in CBCT guidance was also assessed. RESULTS: Accuracies for CBCT were significantly better than CT for the double angulated needle path (2.2 vs 6.7 mm, p<0.001) for all radiologists. CBCT guidance showed no significant differences between the three approaches. For CT, deviations increased with increasing needle path complexity from 3.3 mm for the inplane placements to 4.4 mm (p=0.007) and 6.7 mm (p<0.001) for the angulated and double angulated CT-guided needle placements, respectively. For double angulated needle paths, experienced CBCT users showed consistently higher accuracies than trained users [1.8 mm (range 1.2-2.2) vs 3.3 mm (range 2.1-7.2) deviation from target, respectively; p=0.003]. CONCLUSION: In terms of accuracy, CBCT is the preferred modality, irrespective of the level of user experience, for more difficult guidance procedures requiring double angulated needle paths as in oncological interventions. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Accuracy of CBCT guidance has not been discussed before. CBCT guidance allows accurate needle placement irrespective of needle path complexity. For angulated and double-angulated needle paths, CBCT is more accurate than CT guidance.

SUBMITTER: Busser WM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3798334 | biostudies-other | 2013 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEndobronchial navigation is performed in a variety of ways, none of which are meeting all the clinicians' needs required to reach diagnostic success in every patient. We sought to characterize precurved and steerable guiding sheaths (GS) in endobronchial targeting for lung biopsy using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) based augmented fluoroscopy (AF) image guidance.MethodsFour precurved GS (EdgeTM 45, 90, 180, 180EW, Medtronic) and two steerable GS [6.5 F Destino Twist (DT), Oscor; 6 F Morph, BioCardia] were evaluated alone and in combination with an electromagnetic tracking (EM) guide and biopsy needles in three experimental phases: (I) bench model to assess GS deflection and perform biopsy simulations; (II) ex vivo swine lung comparing 2 steerable and 2 precurved GS; and (III) in vivo male swine lung to deliver a needle (n=2 swine) or to deliver a fiducial marker (n=2 swine) using 2 steerable GS. Ex vivo and in vivo image guidance was performed with either commercial or prototype AF image guidance software (Philips) based on either prior CT or procedural CBCT. Primary outcomes were GS delivery angle (θGS) and needle delivery angle (θN) in bench evaluation and needle delivery error (mm) (mean ± se) for ex vivo and in vivo studies.ResultsThe steerable DT had the largest range of GS delivery angles (θN: 0-114°) with either the 21 G or 19 G biopsy needle in the bench model. In ex vivo swine lung, needle delivery errors were 8.7±0.9 mm (precurved Edge 90), 5.4±1.9 mm (precurved Edge 180), 4.7±1.2 mm (steerable DT), and 5.6±2.4 mm (steerable Morph). In vivo, the needle delivery errors for the steerable GS were 6.0±1.0 mm (DT) and 15±7.0 mm (Morph). In vivo marker coil delivery was successful for both the steerable DT and morph GS. A case report demonstrated successful needle biopsy with the steerable DT.ConclusionsEndobronchial needle delivery with AF guidance is feasible without a bronchoscope with steerable GS providing comparable or improved accuracy compared to precurved GS.

Project description:PurposeTo compare cone-beam computed tomography (CT) navigation vs conventional CT image guidance during biopsies.Materials and methodsPatients scheduled for image-guided biopsies were prospectively and randomly assigned to conventional CT guidance vs cone-beam CT navigation. Radiation dose, accuracy of final needle position, rate of histopathologic diagnosis, and number of needle repositions to reach the target (defined as pullback to adjust position) were compared.ResultsA total of 58 patients (mean age, 57 y; 62.1% men) were randomized: 29 patients underwent 33 biopsies with CT guidance and 29 patients with 33 lesions underwent biopsy with cone-beam CT navigation. The average body mass index (BMI) was similar between groups, at 28.8 kg/m(2) ± 6.55 (P = .18). There was no difference between groups in terms of patient and lesion characteristics (eg, size, depth). The average lesion size was 29.1 ± 12.7mm for CT group vs 32.1mm ±16.8mm for cone-beam CT group (P < 0.59). Location of lesions was equally divided between the 2 groups, 20 lung lesions, 18 renal lesions and 20 other abdominal lesions. Mean number of needle repositions in the cone-beam CT group was 0.3 ± 0.5, compared with 1.9 ± 2.3 with conventional CT (P < .001). The average skin entry dose was 29% lower with cone-beam CT than with conventional CT (P < .04 accounting for BMI). The average estimated effective dose for the planning scan from phantom data was 49% lower with cone-beam CT vs conventional CT (P = .018). Accuracy, defined as the difference between planned and final needle positions, was 4.9 mm ± 4.1 for the cone-beam CT group, compared with 12.2 mm ± 8.1 for conventional CT (P < .001). Histopathologic diagnosis rates were similar between groups, at 90.9% for conventional CT and 93.9% for cone-beam CT (P = .67).ConclusionsCone-beam CT navigation for biopsies improved targeting accuracy with fewer needle repositions, lower skin entry dose, and lower effective dose for planning scan, and a comparable histopathologic diagnosis rate.

Project description:Real-time surgical navigation relies on accurate image-to-world registration to align the coordinate systems of the image and patient. Conventional manual registration can present a workflow bottleneck and is prone to manual error and intraoperator variability. This work reports alternative means of automatic image-to-world registration, each method involving an automatic registration marker (ARM) used in conjunction with C-arm cone-beam CT (CBCT). The first involves a Known-Model registration method in which the ARM is a predefined tool, and the second is a Free-Form method in which the ARM is freely configurable.Studies were performed using a prototype C-arm for CBCT and a surgical tracking system. A simple ARM was designed with markers comprising a tungsten sphere within infrared reflectors to permit detection of markers in both x-ray projections and by an infrared tracker. The Known-Model method exercised a predefined specification of the ARM in combination with 3D-2D registration to estimate the transformation that yields the optimal match between forward projection of the ARM and the measured projection images. The Free-Form method localizes markers individually in projection data by a robust Hough transform approach extended from previous work, backprojected to 3D image coordinates based on C-arm geometric calibration. Image-domain point sets were transformed to world coordinates by rigid-body point-based registration. The robustness and registration accuracy of each method was tested in comparison to manual registration across a range of body sites (head, thorax, and abdomen) of interest in CBCT-guided surgery, including cases with interventional tools in the radiographic scene.The automatic methods exhibited similar target registration error (TRE) and were comparable or superior to manual registration for placement of the ARM within ∼200 mm of C-arm isocenter. Marker localization in projection data was robust across all anatomical sites, including challenging scenarios involving the presence of interventional tools. The reprojection error of marker localization was independent of the distance of the ARM from isocenter, and the overall TRE was dominated by the configuration of individual fiducials and distance from the target as predicted by theory. The median TRE increased with greater ARM-to-isocenter distance (e.g., for the Free-Form method, TRE increasing from 0.78 mm to 2.04 mm at distances of ∼75 mm and 370 mm, respectively). The median TRE within ∼200 mm distance was consistently lower than that of the manual method (TRE = 0.82 mm). Registration performance was independent of anatomical site (head, thorax, and abdomen). The Free-Form method demonstrated a statistically significant improvement (p = 0.0044) in reproducibility compared to manual registration (0.22 mm versus 0.30 mm, respectively).Automatic image-to-world registration methods demonstrate the potential for improved accuracy, reproducibility, and workflow in CBCT-guided procedures. A Free-Form method was shown to exhibit robustness against anatomical site, with comparable or improved TRE compared to manual registration. It was also comparable or superior in performance to a Known-Model method in which the ARM configuration is specified as a predefined tool, thereby allowing configuration of fiducials on the fly or attachment to the patient.

Dataset Information

Cone beam CT guidance provides superior accuracy for complex needle paths compared with CT guidance.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets