Limits...
Intervention Planning Using a Laser Navigation System for CT-Guided Interventions: A Phantom and Patient Study.

Gruber-Rouh T, Lee C, Bolck J, Naguib NN, Schulz B, Eichler K, Aschenbach R, Wichmann JL, Vogl TJ, Zangos S - Korean J Radiol (2015)

Bottom Line: An additional 20 LNS-guided interventions were performed on another phantom to confirm accuracy.The LNS group achieved target point accuracy of 5.0 ± 1.2 mm, entrance point accuracy of 2.0 ± 1.5 mm, needle angulation accuracy of 1.5 ± 0.3°, intervention time of 12.08 ± 3.07 minutes, and used 5.7 ± 1.6 CT-images for the first experience with patients.Laser navigation system improved accuracy, duration of intervention, and radiation dose of CT-guided interventions.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, J. W. Goethe University of Frankfurt, Frankfurt 60590, Germany.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To investigate the accuracy, efficiency and radiation dose of a novel laser navigation system (LNS) compared to those of free-handed punctures on computed tomography (CT).

Materials and methods: Sixty punctures were performed using a phantom body to compare accuracy, timely effort, and radiation dose of the conventional free-handed procedure to those of the LNS-guided method. An additional 20 LNS-guided interventions were performed on another phantom to confirm accuracy. Ten patients subsequently underwent LNS-guided punctures.

Results: The phantom 1-LNS group showed a target point accuracy of 4.0 ± 2.7 mm (freehand, 6.3 ± 3.6 mm; p = 0.008), entrance point accuracy of 0.8 ± 0.6 mm (freehand, 6.1 ± 4.7 mm), needle angulation accuracy of 1.3 ± 0.9° (freehand, 3.4 ± 3.1°; p < 0.001), intervention time of 7.03 ± 5.18 minutes (freehand, 8.38 ± 4.09 minutes; p = 0.006), and 4.2 ± 3.6 CT images (freehand, 7.9 ± 5.1; p < 0.001). These results show significant improvement in 60 punctures compared to freehand. The phantom 2-LNS group showed a target point accuracy of 3.6 ± 2.5 mm, entrance point accuracy of 1.4 ± 2.0 mm, needle angulation accuracy of 1.0 ± 1.2°, intervention time of 1.44 ± 0.22 minutes, and 3.4 ± 1.7 CT images. The LNS group achieved target point accuracy of 5.0 ± 1.2 mm, entrance point accuracy of 2.0 ± 1.5 mm, needle angulation accuracy of 1.5 ± 0.3°, intervention time of 12.08 ± 3.07 minutes, and used 5.7 ± 1.6 CT-images for the first experience with patients.

Conclusion: Laser navigation system improved accuracy, duration of intervention, and radiation dose of CT-guided interventions.

No MeSH data available.


Laser navigation system (LNS) is fixed to carrying arm attached to computed tomography (CT) room ceiling.C-arm of LNS is positioned in front of gantry (arrow). System does not impair regular use of CT room.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4499536&req=5

Figure 1: Laser navigation system (LNS) is fixed to carrying arm attached to computed tomography (CT) room ceiling.C-arm of LNS is positioned in front of gantry (arrow). System does not impair regular use of CT room.

Mentions: A third-generation 64-slice CT scanner (Somatom Definition AS, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany) was used for this study. The CT-guided LNS device (Amedo STS GmbH, Bochum, Germany) consisted of a movable, rotating laser unit on a 220° circular rail surrounding the patient table in front of the CT gantry, an image processing unit to position the laser, and navigation software for interventional planning. The laser system was fixed to a carrying arm, which is attached to the CT room ceiling (Fig. 1). The LNS included the following components: 1) 220° gantry arc with motorised laser positioning unit, 2) support arm for mounting the gantry arc, and 3) a computer with operating terminal and planning software.


Intervention Planning Using a Laser Navigation System for CT-Guided Interventions: A Phantom and Patient Study.

Gruber-Rouh T, Lee C, Bolck J, Naguib NN, Schulz B, Eichler K, Aschenbach R, Wichmann JL, Vogl TJ, Zangos S - Korean J Radiol (2015)

Laser navigation system (LNS) is fixed to carrying arm attached to computed tomography (CT) room ceiling.C-arm of LNS is positioned in front of gantry (arrow). System does not impair regular use of CT room.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4499536&req=5

Figure 1: Laser navigation system (LNS) is fixed to carrying arm attached to computed tomography (CT) room ceiling.C-arm of LNS is positioned in front of gantry (arrow). System does not impair regular use of CT room.
Mentions: A third-generation 64-slice CT scanner (Somatom Definition AS, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany) was used for this study. The CT-guided LNS device (Amedo STS GmbH, Bochum, Germany) consisted of a movable, rotating laser unit on a 220° circular rail surrounding the patient table in front of the CT gantry, an image processing unit to position the laser, and navigation software for interventional planning. The laser system was fixed to a carrying arm, which is attached to the CT room ceiling (Fig. 1). The LNS included the following components: 1) 220° gantry arc with motorised laser positioning unit, 2) support arm for mounting the gantry arc, and 3) a computer with operating terminal and planning software.

Bottom Line: An additional 20 LNS-guided interventions were performed on another phantom to confirm accuracy.The LNS group achieved target point accuracy of 5.0 ± 1.2 mm, entrance point accuracy of 2.0 ± 1.5 mm, needle angulation accuracy of 1.5 ± 0.3°, intervention time of 12.08 ± 3.07 minutes, and used 5.7 ± 1.6 CT-images for the first experience with patients.Laser navigation system improved accuracy, duration of intervention, and radiation dose of CT-guided interventions.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, J. W. Goethe University of Frankfurt, Frankfurt 60590, Germany.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To investigate the accuracy, efficiency and radiation dose of a novel laser navigation system (LNS) compared to those of free-handed punctures on computed tomography (CT).

Materials and methods: Sixty punctures were performed using a phantom body to compare accuracy, timely effort, and radiation dose of the conventional free-handed procedure to those of the LNS-guided method. An additional 20 LNS-guided interventions were performed on another phantom to confirm accuracy. Ten patients subsequently underwent LNS-guided punctures.

Results: The phantom 1-LNS group showed a target point accuracy of 4.0 ± 2.7 mm (freehand, 6.3 ± 3.6 mm; p = 0.008), entrance point accuracy of 0.8 ± 0.6 mm (freehand, 6.1 ± 4.7 mm), needle angulation accuracy of 1.3 ± 0.9° (freehand, 3.4 ± 3.1°; p < 0.001), intervention time of 7.03 ± 5.18 minutes (freehand, 8.38 ± 4.09 minutes; p = 0.006), and 4.2 ± 3.6 CT images (freehand, 7.9 ± 5.1; p < 0.001). These results show significant improvement in 60 punctures compared to freehand. The phantom 2-LNS group showed a target point accuracy of 3.6 ± 2.5 mm, entrance point accuracy of 1.4 ± 2.0 mm, needle angulation accuracy of 1.0 ± 1.2°, intervention time of 1.44 ± 0.22 minutes, and 3.4 ± 1.7 CT images. The LNS group achieved target point accuracy of 5.0 ± 1.2 mm, entrance point accuracy of 2.0 ± 1.5 mm, needle angulation accuracy of 1.5 ± 0.3°, intervention time of 12.08 ± 3.07 minutes, and used 5.7 ± 1.6 CT-images for the first experience with patients.

Conclusion: Laser navigation system improved accuracy, duration of intervention, and radiation dose of CT-guided interventions.

No MeSH data available.