Accuracy and Precision of a Surgical Navigation System: Effect of Camera and Patient Tracker Position and Number of Active Markers

Kenneth R Gundle, Jedediah K White, Ernest U Conrad, Randal P Ching, Kenneth R Gundle, Jedediah K White, Ernest U Conrad, Randal P Ching

Abstract

Introduction: Surgical navigation systems are increasingly used to aid resection and reconstruction of osseous malignancies. In the process of implementing image-based surgical navigation systems, there are numerous opportunities for error that may impact surgical outcome. This study aimed to examine modifiable sources of error in an idealized scenario, when using a bidirectional infrared surgical navigation system.

Materials and methods: Accuracy and precision were assessed using a computerized-numerical-controlled (CNC) machined grid with known distances between indentations while varying: 1) the distance from the grid to the navigation camera (range 150 to 247cm), 2) the distance from the grid to the patient tracker device (range 20 to 40cm), and 3) whether the minimum or maximum number of bidirectional infrared markers were actively functioning. For each scenario, distances between grid points were measured at 10-mm increments between 10 and 120mm, with twelve measurements made at each distance. The accuracy outcome was the root mean square (RMS) error between the navigation system distance and the actual grid distance. To assess precision, four indentations were recorded six times for each scenario while also varying the angle of the navigation system pointer. The outcome for precision testing was the standard deviation of the distance between each measured point to the mean three-dimensional coordinate of the six points for each cluster.

Results: Univariate and multiple linear regression revealed that as the distance from the navigation camera to the grid increased, the RMS error increased (p<0.001). The RMS error also increased when not all infrared markers were actively tracking (p=0.03), and as the measured distance increased (p<0.001). In a multivariate model, these factors accounted for 58% of the overall variance in the RMS error. Standard deviations in repeated measures also increased when not all infrared markers were active (p<0.001), and as the distance between navigation camera and physical space increased (p=0.005). Location of the patient tracker did not affect accuracy (0.36) or precision (p=0.97).

Conclusion: In our model laboratory test environment, the infrared bidirectional navigation system was more accurate and precise when the distance from the navigation camera to the physical (working) space was minimized and all bidirectional markers were active. These findings may require alterations in operating room setup and software changes to improve the performance of this system.

Keywords: Accuracy; Bone tumors; Computer-assisted surgery; Error; Registration; Surgical Navigation.

Figures

Fig. (1)
Fig. (1)
Experimental Setup, with patient tracker, pointer and machined grid.
Fig. (2)
Fig. (2)
Average root mean squared error in navigation system, by distance from navigation camera.
Fig. (3)
Fig. (3)
Average root mean squared error in navigation system, by distance measured.

References

    1. Tjardes T., Shafizadeh S., Rixen D., Paffrath T., Bouillon B., Steinhausen E.S., Baethis H. Image-guided spine surgery: State of the art and future directions. Eur. Spine J. 2010;19(1):25–45. doi: 10.1007/s00586-009-1091-9.
    1. Gelalis I.D., Paschos N.K., Pakos E.E., Politis A.N., Arnaoutoglou C.M., Karageorgos A.C., Ploumis A., Xenakis T.A. Accuracy of pedicle screw placement: A systematic review of prospective in vivo studies comparing free hand, fluoroscopy guidance and navigation techniques. Eur. Spine J. 2012;21(2):247–255. doi: 10.1007/s00586-011-2011-3.
    1. Cho H.S., Kang H.G., Kim H-S., Han I. Computer-assisted sacral tumor resection. A case report. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 2008;90(7):1561–1566. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.G.00928.
    1. Gras F., Marintschev I., Klos K., Mückley T., Hofmann G.O., Kahler D.M. Screw placement for acetabular fractures: Which navigation modality (2-dimensional vs. 3-dimensional) should be used? An experimental study. J. Orthop. Trauma. 2012;26(8):466–473. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0b013e318234d443.
    1. Beckmann J., Stengel D., Tingart M., Götz J., Grifka J., Lüring C. Navigated cup implantation in hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop. 2009;80(5):538–544. doi: 10.3109/17453670903350073.
    1. Wong K-C., Kumta S-M. Use of computer navigation in orthopedic oncology. Curr. Surg. Rep. 2014;2(4):47. doi: 10.1007/s40137-014-0047-0.
    1. Sternheim A., Daly M., Qiu J., Weersink R., Chan H., Jaffray D., Irish J.C., Ferguson P.C., Wunder J.S. Navigated pelvic osteotomy and tumor resection: A study assessing the accuracy and reproducibility of resection planes in Sawbones and cadavers. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 2015;97(1):40–46. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.N.00276.
    1. Aponte-Tinao L., Ritacco L.E., Ayerza M.A., Muscolo D.L., Albergo J.I., Farfalli G.L. Does intraoperative navigation assistance improve bone tumor resection and allograft reconstruction results? Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 2015;473(3):796–804. doi: 10.1007/s11999-014-3604-z.
    1. Wixson R.L. Computer-assisted total hip navigation. Instr. Course Lect. 2008;57:707–720.
    1. Wong K.C., Kumta S.M. Joint-preserving tumor resection and reconstruction using image-guided computer navigation. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 2013;471(3):762–773. doi: 10.1007/s11999-012-2536-8.
    1. Clarke J.V., Deakin A.H., Nicol A.C., Picard F. Measuring the positional accuracy of computer assisted surgical tracking systems. Comput. Aided Surg. 2010;15(1-3):13–18. doi: 10.3109/10929081003775774.
    1. Simon D.A., Lavallée S. Medical imaging and registration in computer assisted surgery. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 1998;(354):17–27. doi: 10.1097/00003086-199809000-00004.
    1. Langlotz F. Potential pitfalls of computer aided orthopedic surgery. Injury. 2004;35(Suppl. 1):S-A17–23. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2004.05.006.
    1. Schramm A., Suarez-Cunqueiro M.M., Rücker M., Kokemueller H., Bormann K.H., Metzger M.C., Gellrich N.C. Computer-assisted therapy in orbital and mid-facial reconstructions. Int. J. Med. Robot. 2009;5(2):111–124. doi: 10.1002/rcs.245.
    1. Fitzpatrick J. Fiducial registration error and target registration error are uncorrelated. Proc. SPIE. 2009;7261:1–12. doi: 10.1117/12.813601.
    1. Jolles B.M., Genoud P., Hoffmeyer P. Computer-assisted cup placement techniques in total hip arthroplasty improve accuracy of placement. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 2004;(426):174–179. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000141903.08075.83.
    1. Parratte S., Argenson J-N. Validation and usefulness of a computer-assisted cup-positioning system in total hip arthroplasty. A prospective, randomized, controlled study. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 2007;89(3):494–499.
    1. Yau W.P., Leung A., Chiu K.Y., Tang W.M., Ng T.P. Intraobserver errors in obtaining visually selected anatomic landmarks during registration process in nonimage-based navigation-assisted total knee arthroplasty: a cadaveric experiment. J. Arthroplasty. 2005;20(5):591–601. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2005.02.011.
    1. Yau W.P., Leung A., Liu K.G., Yan C.H., Wong L.L., Chiu K.Y. Interobserver and intra-observer errors in obtaining visually selected anatomical landmarks during registration process in non-image-based navigation-assisted total knee arthroplasty. J. Arthroplasty. 2007;22(8):1150–1161. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2006.10.010.
    1. Mascott C.R., Sol J-C., Bousquet P., Lagarrigue J., Lazorthes Y., Lauwers-Cances V. Quantification of true in vivo (application) accuracy in cranial image-guided surgery: influence of mode of patient registration. Neurosurgery. 2006;59(1) Suppl. 1:ONS146–ONS156.
    1. Wong K.C., Kumta S.M., Chiu K-H., Cheung K.W., Leung K.S., Unwin P., Wong M.C. Computer assisted pelvic tumor resection and reconstruction with a custom-made prosthesis using an innovative adaptation and its validation. Comput. Aided Surg. 2007;12(4):225–232. doi: 10.3109/10929080701536046.
    1. Rudolph T., Ebert L., Kowal J. Comparison of three optical tracking systems in a complex navigation scenario. Comput. Aided Surg. 2010;15(4-6):104–109. doi: 10.3109/10929088.2010.530793.

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi