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.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Computed tomography image of patient with pleural effusion left.Confirmation of needle position in comparison to planned needle path for intervention using laser navigation system in patient with pleural effusion left.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

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

Figure 4: Computed tomography image of patient with pleural effusion left.Confirmation of needle position in comparison to planned needle path for intervention using laser navigation system in patient with pleural effusion left.

Mentions: Ten patients underwent LNS-guided punctures (Fig. 4). Table 2 summarises the interventional procedures performed in the patient group. Mean target access path within the patients in the LNS group was 61.3 ± 11.3 mm. Target point accuracy in the patient group was 5.0 ± 1.2 mm, and needle entrance point accuracy was 2.0 ± 1.5 mm. Needle angulation accuracy was 1.5 ± 0.3°.


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)

Computed tomography image of patient with pleural effusion left.Confirmation of needle position in comparison to planned needle path for intervention using laser navigation system in patient with pleural effusion left.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

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

Figure 4: Computed tomography image of patient with pleural effusion left.Confirmation of needle position in comparison to planned needle path for intervention using laser navigation system in patient with pleural effusion left.
Mentions: Ten patients underwent LNS-guided punctures (Fig. 4). Table 2 summarises the interventional procedures performed in the patient group. Mean target access path within the patients in the LNS group was 61.3 ± 11.3 mm. Target point accuracy in the patient group was 5.0 ± 1.2 mm, and needle entrance point accuracy was 2.0 ± 1.5 mm. Needle angulation accuracy was 1.5 ± 0.3°.

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.


Related in: MedlinePlus