publication . Article . 2017

Evaluación del error y la incertidumbre de un sistema de neuronavegación, estudio basado en una estructura acrílica

Walter Serna-Serna; Natalia Izquierdo-Cifuentes; Genaro Daza-Santacoloma;
Open Access English
  • Published: 21 Feb 2017 Journal: TecnoLógicas (issn: 0123-7799, eissn: 2256-5337, Copyright policy)
  • Publisher: Instituto Tecnológico Metropolitano
Abstract
This document describes a calibration protocol with the intention to introduce a guide to standardize the metrological vocabulary among manufacturers of image-guided surgery systems. Two stages were developed to measure the errors and estimate the uncertainty of a neuronavigator in different situations, on the first one it was determined a mechanical error on a virtual model of an acrylic phantom, on the second it was determined a coordinate error on the computerized axial tomography scan of the same phantom. Ten standard coordinates of the phantom were compared with the coordinates generated by the NeuroCPS. After measurement model was established, there were i...
Subjects
free text keywords: Image-guided surgery, optical tracking, error, uncertainty, acrylic phantom, metrology, Technology, T, Engineering (General). Civil engineering (General), TA1-2040, Computer vision, Artificial intelligence, business.industry, business, Two stages, Measurement uncertainty, Axial tomography, Virtual model, Imaging phantom, Calibration, Computer science
25 references, page 1 of 2

accuracy: a systematic retrospective analysis of factors influencing the mismatch of frameless stereotactic systems in cranial neurosurgery.,” Neurosurgery, vol. 72, no. 5, pp. 796-807, May 2013.

Eng., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 119-142, Jul. 2010.

Filippi, “Computer-aided navigation in neurosurgery,” Neurosurg. Rev., vol. 26, no.

2, pp. 73-99, May 2003.

Weiner, “Comparison of frameless stereotactic systems: accuracy, precision, and applications,” Neurosurgery, vol. 49, no. 6, pp. 1409-1416, 2001.

Torresin, and M. Bucciolini, “Neuronavigation accuracy dependence on CT and MR imaging parameters: a phantombased study,” Phys. Med. Biol., vol. 48, no.

14, pp. 2199-2216, Jul. 2003.

Head Neck Surg., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 27-31, 2005.

M. Cartellieri, J. Kremser, and F. Vorbeck, “Comparison of different 3D navigation systems by a clinical 'user,'” Eur. Arch. otorhino-laryngology, vol. 258, no. 1, pp. 38-41, 2001.

Radiol. Surg., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 45-52, 2009.

Adler, G. Steinberg, and R. Shahidi, “A Comparative Statistical Error Analysis of Neuronavigation Systems in a Clinical Setting,” in International Conference on Medical Image Computing and ComputerAssisted Intervention, 2000, pp. 144-153.

S. Barszcz, M. Roszkowski, P. Daszkiewicz, E. Jurkiewicz, and A. Maryniak, “Accuracy of intraoperative registration during electromagnetic neuronavigation in intracranial procedures performed in children.,” Neurol. Neurochir. Pol., vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 122-127, 2006. [OpenAIRE]

[13] [15] [17] [19] M. Ammirati, J. D. Gross, G. Ammirati, and S. Dugan, “Comparison of registration accuracy of skin-and bone-implanted fiducials for frameless stereotaxis of the brain: a prospective study,” Skull Base, vol.

12, no. 3, p. 125, 2002.

M. N. Wang and Z. J. Song, “Classification and analysis of the errors in neuronavigation.,” Neurosurgery, vol. 68, no.

25 references, page 1 of 2
Any information missing or wrong?Report an Issue