Department of Neurological Surgery, Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio 43210, USA.
Neurosurgery. 2010 Sep;67(3 Suppl Operative):ons85-90; discussion ons90. doi: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000383751.63835.2F.
Image guidance systems are widely used in neurosurgical practice.
To compare the operational accuracy of a neuronavigation system when registration was accomplished with a commercially available surface-based autoregistration system vs other fiducial-based registrations.
We evaluated the operational accuracy of different registration methods in 20 cadaveric heads. Every specimen was prepared with 10 titanium microscrews functioning as external/internal targets and as bone fiducials. Six scalp fiducials were also affixed to each specimen that was registered with bone, scalp fiducials, and the autoregistration mask. The coordinates of all the target points were measured, first manually on the screen of the navigation system and then by touching the head of the implanted screw on the specimen. The difference between the real and virtual coordinates was calculated.
Means of the differences for external anterior targets were 1.96, 3.12, and 3.20 mm and 1.95, 3.24, and 3.19 mm for external posterior targets for the bone fiducials, adhesive fiducials, and autoregistration mask, respectively. Means of the differences for internal anterior targets were 2.60, 3.65, and 2.16 mm and 2.91, 3.83, and 2.41 mm for internal posterior targets for the bone fiducials, adhesive fiducials, and autoregistration mask, respectively.
Bone fiducial registration is associated with a statistically greater operational accuracy than scalp adhesive fiducials and the autoregistration mask in reaching anterior and posterior external targets (P < .001). Registration accomplished with the autoregistration mask is associated with a statistically greater operational accuracy in reaching internal targets than adhesive fiducials registration (P < .001) or bone fiducials registration (P < .05 and P < .01 for anterior and posterior targets, respectively).
影像引导系统在神经外科实践中被广泛应用。
比较使用商业表面自动配准系统和其他基于基准的配准进行神经导航系统注册时的操作精度。
我们评估了不同注册方法在 20 个尸体头颅中的操作精度。每个标本都用 10 个钛微螺丝作为外部/内部目标和骨基准进行准备。每个标本还固定了 6 个头皮基准，并用骨、头皮基准和自动配准罩进行注册。所有目标点的坐标都在导航系统的屏幕上首先进行手动测量，然后通过触摸标本上植入螺丝的头部进行测量。计算真实坐标和虚拟坐标之间的差异。
对于外部前目标，基于骨基准、粘贴基准和自动配准罩的外部后目标的差异平均值分别为 1.96、3.12 和 3.20 毫米以及 1.95、3.24 和 3.19 毫米。对于内部前目标，基于骨基准、粘贴基准和自动配准罩的内部后目标的差异平均值分别为 2.60、3.65 和 2.16 毫米以及 2.91、3.83 和 2.41 毫米。
与头皮粘贴基准和自动配准罩相比，骨基准注册在到达前、后外部目标时具有更高的操作精度（P<0.001）。与粘贴基准注册或骨基准注册相比，使用自动配准罩进行的注册在到达内部目标时具有更高的操作精度（P<0.001）（前、后目标分别为 P<0.05 和 P<0.01）。
