Navigation überspringen
Universitätsbibliothek Heidelberg
Status: Bibliographieeintrag

Verfügbarkeit
Standort: ---
Exemplare: ---
heiBIB
 Online-Ressource
Verfasst von:Paraskevopoulos, Dimitrios [VerfasserIn]   i
 Unterberg, Andreas [VerfasserIn]   i
 Metzner, Roland [VerfasserIn]   i
 Dreyhaupt, Jens [VerfasserIn]   i
 Eggers, Georg [VerfasserIn]   i
 Wirtz, Christian Rainer [VerfasserIn]   i
Titel:Comparative study of application accuracy of two frameless neuronavigation systems
Titelzusatz:experimental error assessment quantifying registration methods and clinically influencing factors
Verf.angabe:Dimitrios Paraskevopoulos, Andreas Unterberg, Roland Metzner, Jens Dreyhaupt, Georg Eggers, Christian Rainer Wirtz
E-Jahr:2011
Jahr:19 January 2011
Umfang:12 S.
Fussnoten:Gesehen am 08.09.2022
Titel Quelle:Enthalten in: Neurosurgical review
Ort Quelle:Berlin : Springer, 1978
Jahr Quelle:2011
Band/Heft Quelle:34(2011), 2, Seite 217-228
ISSN Quelle:1437-2320
Abstract:This study aimed at comparing the accuracy of two commercial neuronavigation systems. Error assessment and quantification of clinical factors and surface registration, often resulting in decreased accuracy, were intended. Active (Stryker Navigation) and passive (VectorVision Sky, BrainLAB) neuronavigation systems were tested with an anthropomorphic phantom with a deformable layer, simulating skin and soft tissue. True coordinates measured by computer numerical control were compared with coordinates on image data and during navigation, to calculate software and system accuracy respectively. Comparison of image and navigation coordinates was used to evaluate navigation accuracy. Both systems achieved an overall accuracy of <1.5 mm. Stryker achieved better software accuracy, whereas BrainLAB better system and navigation accuracy. Factors with conspicuous influence (P<0.01) were imaging, instrument replacement, sterile cover drape and geometry of instruments. Precision data indicated by the systems did not reflect measured accuracy in general. Surface matching resulted in no improvement of accuracy, confirming former studies. Laser registration showed no differences compared to conventional pointers. Differences between the two systems were limited. Surface registration may improve inaccurate point-based registrations but does not in general affect overall accuracy. Accuracy feedback by the systems does not always match with true target accuracy and requires critical evaluation from the surgeon.
DOI:doi:10.1007/s10143-010-0302-5
URL:Bitte beachten Sie: Dies ist ein Bibliographieeintrag. Ein Volltextzugriff für Mitglieder der Universität besteht hier nur, falls für die entsprechende Zeitschrift/den entsprechenden Sammelband ein Abonnement besteht oder es sich um einen OpenAccess-Titel handelt.

Volltext: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-010-0302-5
 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-010-0302-5
Datenträger:Online-Ressource
Sprache:eng
Sach-SW:Computers
 Data Display
 Humans
 Image Processing, Computer-Assisted
 Magnetic Resonance Imaging
 Neuronavigation
 Neurosurgical Procedures
 Phantoms, Imaging
 Reproducibility of Results
 Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted
 Software
 Surgery, Computer-Assisted
 Tomography, X-Ray Computed
K10plus-PPN:1816292117
Verknüpfungen:→ Zeitschrift

Permanenter Link auf diesen Titel (bookmarkfähig):  https://katalog.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/titel/68962094   QR-Code
zum Seitenanfang