• Der Unfallchirurg · Sep 2009

    Comparative Study

    [Best matching. Experimental comparison of different matching procedures for use in computer navigation].

    • A Schäffler, B König, N P Haas, and U Stöckle.
    • Abteilung für Unfallchirurgie, Klinik für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie , Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München. schaeffler@uchir.me.tum.de
    • Unfallchirurg. 2009 Sep 1; 112 (9): 809-14.

    IntroductionComputer navigation systems are increasingly becoming an integral part of the surgical routine in orthopedic and trauma surgery due to improvements in intraoperative visualization procedures. The matching, i.e. data alignment between virtual and therapeutic objects, is however still a persisting problem. In recent years various matching procedures have been developed to attempt to solve the problem. In this study we compared three matching procedures using the VectorVision navigation system.Material And MethodsFor each matching procedure three artificial models of the lumbar spine (TH10-Os sacrum, Synbone, Malans CH) were used with the VectorVision system as navigation system (BrainLAB, Feldkirchen/Siemens, Erlangen, Germany). The experimental setup was standardized for the different navigational methods. First a CT scan of the models was acquired and based on this data set a master planning for all pedicle drillings was performed. A total of 48 drillings with pairpoint, region or CT fluoromatching were accomplished and evaluated. The time periods needed for the matching procedures were documented and compared with each other. The precision of the drillings was evaluated within the postinterventional CT. Altogether 144 drillings for pedicle screws were performed on artificial models based on an identical planning for all test series.ResultsWithin the experimental study of 144 drillings, only 2 perforations (1.3%) of the lateral cortical wall were detected. The time needed for the matching procedure was the shortest for region matching, followed by the pairpoint matching. The CT fluoromatching was the longest procedure. Variations in the distance of the individual drilling to the cortical wall were comparably large in all test series (on average 1.3 mm). Significant differences concerning the precision of the different matching procedures could only be shown for pairpoint matching.ConclusionIn our study pairpoint matching was the only procedure without misplacement and on average had the largest safety margin for drillings. Thus this method was the most precise procedure. The region matching procedure offers the advantage of the fastest matching with comparable precision.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.