Schäffler A, König B, Haas N P, Stöckle U
Abteilung für Unfallchirurgie, Klinik für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie , Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München.
Unfallchirurg. 2009 Sep;112(9):809-14. doi: 10.1007/s00113-009-1593-2.
Computer 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.
For 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.
Within 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.
In 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.
由于术中可视化程序的改进,计算机导航系统在骨科和创伤手术中越来越成为手术常规的一个组成部分。然而,匹配,即虚拟物体与治疗物体之间的数据对齐,仍然是一个持续存在的问题。近年来,已经开发了各种匹配程序来试图解决这个问题。在本研究中,我们使用VectorVision导航系统比较了三种匹配程序。
对于每种匹配程序,使用三个腰椎人工模型(TH10 - 骶骨、Synbone、Malans CH),并将VectorVision系统用作导航系统(BrainLAB,德国埃尔朗根费尔德基兴/西门子公司)。针对不同的导航方法,实验设置进行了标准化。首先获取模型的CT扫描图像,并基于此数据集对所有椎弓根钻孔进行总体规划。总共完成并评估了48次使用点对点、区域或CT荧光匹配的钻孔。记录匹配程序所需的时间段并相互比较。在介入后CT内评估钻孔的精度。基于所有测试系列的相同规划,在人工模型上总共进行了144次椎弓根螺钉钻孔。
在144次钻孔的实验研究中,仅检测到2次(1.3%)外侧皮质壁穿孔。匹配程序所需时间最短的是区域匹配,其次是点对点匹配。CT荧光匹配是最长的程序。在所有测试系列中,各个钻孔到皮质壁的距离变化相对较大(平均1.3毫米)。不同匹配程序的精度方面的显著差异仅在点对点匹配中显示出来。
在我们的研究中,点对点匹配是唯一没有错位的程序,并且平均而言钻孔的安全 margin最大。因此,该方法是最精确的程序。区域匹配程序具有匹配速度最快且精度相当的优点。