Comparison of adhesive markers, anatomical landmarks, and surface matching in patient-to-image registration for frameless stereotaxy

Peter W. A. Willems; Jan Willem Berkelbach van der Sprenkel; Cees A. F. Tulleken M.D.

doi:10.1117/12.413791

19 January 2001 Comparison of adhesive markers, anatomical landmarks, and surface matching in patient-to-image registration for frameless stereotaxy

Peter W. A. Willems, Jan Willem Berkelbach van der Sprenkel, Cees A. F. Tulleken M.D.

Author Affiliations +

Proceedings Volume 4158, Biomonitoring and Endoscopy Technologies; (2001) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.413791
Event: EOS/SPIE European Biomedical Optics Week, 2000, Amsterdam, Netherlands

Abstract

The application accuracy of frameless stereotaxy depends partly on the accuracy of the patient-to-image registration procedure. We compared the application accuracy of registration procedures based on anatomical landmarks, surface matching, and adhesive markers. After acquisition of a 3D-MRI volume, 30 patients were subjected to all three registration procedures. Frameless stereotaxy was performed with the STN system (Carl Zeiss, Germany). Following each registration procedure, the root-mean-squared-error (RMSE) and the target registration error (TRE) of an extra adhesive marker (target) were recorded. The first represents the goodness-of-fit of the registration procedure (not available in surface matching) while the second represents the application accuracy. The mean TRE+/- SD for each type of registration was 5.3+/- 2.1mm, 9.4+/- 6.6mm, and 3.6+/- 1.6mm (paired t-tests: p<0.01). When anatomical landmarks were used, anterior targets generated smaller TREs than posterior targets (4.6+/- 2.0mm and 6.8+/- 1.3mm respectively, t-test: p<0.01). There was no significant correlation between the RMSE and the TRE (anatomical landmarks: R₂=0.071, adhesive markers: R₂=0.004). A more detailed evaluation of surface matching, using a plastic skull phantom, also could not demonstrate an improvement in application accuracy due to surface matching. In conclusion, our results indicate that adhesive markers offer the most accurate alternative to bonescrews. However, we believe anatomical landmarks to provide sufficient accuracy for many neurosurgical procedures concerning frontally located targets, reducing the need for extra preoperative imaging.

Citation Download Citation

Peter W. A. Willems, Jan Willem Berkelbach van der Sprenkel, and Cees A. F. Tulleken M.D. "Comparison of adhesive markers, anatomical landmarks, and surface matching in patient-to-image registration for frameless stereotaxy", Proc. SPIE 4158, Biomonitoring and Endoscopy Technologies, (19 January 2001); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.413791

ACCESS THE FULL ARTICLE

INSTITUTIONAL
Select your institution to access the SPIE Digital Library.

SELECT YOUR INSTITUTION

PERSONAL
Sign in with your SPIE account to access your personal subscriptions or to use specific features such as save to my library, sign up for alerts, save searches, etc.

PERSONAL SIGN IN

No SPIE Account? Create one

PURCHASE THIS CONTENT

SUBSCRIBE TO DIGITAL LIBRARY

50 downloads per 1-year subscription

Members: $195

Non-members: $335 ADD TO CART

25 downloads per 1 - year subscription

Members: $145

Non-members: $250 ADD TO CART

PURCHASE SINGLE ARTICLE

Includes PDF, HTML & Video, when available