Department of Spine Surgery, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Beijing Key Laboratory of Robotic Orthopaedics, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2018 Nov 15;43(22):E1329-E1333. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002704.
A model experiment.
To measure and compare the clinical accuracy of point-to-point registration (PR) and auto-registration (AR) in an operative set using an active infrared navigation system.
PR and AR are two major registration methods of navigation assisted spinal surgery. No previous study compared the difference between the two methods with respect to clinical accuracy.
A novel method was used to measure the clinical accuracy of the navigation system under an operative set using a Sawbone model with titanium beads on the surface, which was essential to measure the accuracy numerically, instead of a real patient. Both the operative set and the procedure mimicked a regular surgery. The clinical accuracy was defined as the average distance between the "navigation coordinate" and the "image coordinate." The clinical accuracy of the PR using preoperative computed tomography (CT) images and the AR using intraoperative CT images was measured and compared.
The average clinical accuracy of PR was different among different segments. The accuracy of the most accurate segment, which provided the reference points during the PR, was 1.10 mm. In the two segments adjacent to the reference segment, the clinical accuracy deteriorated to 1.37 and 1.50 mm. The accuracy of the farther segments was worse. In comparison, the clinical accuracy of different segments of AR was of no significant difference. The average accuracy of AR was 0.74 mm, which was significantly better than the best accuracy of PR.
AR is better than PR with respect to clinical accuracy in navigation assisted spinal surgery.
N/A.
模型实验。
使用主动红外导航系统，测量并比较手术环境下点对点配准（PR）和自动配准（AR）的临床准确性。
PR 和 AR 是导航辅助脊柱手术中两种主要的配准方法。以前没有研究比较过这两种方法在临床准确性方面的差异。
使用表面带有钛珠的 Sawbone 模型，我们采用了一种新的方法来测量手术环境下导航系统的临床准确性，这对于数值测量精度至关重要，而不是在真实患者身上进行。手术环境和手术过程都模拟了常规手术。临床准确性定义为“导航坐标”和“图像坐标”之间的平均距离。测量并比较了使用术前计算机断层扫描（CT）图像的 PR 和使用术中 CT 图像的 AR 的临床准确性。
PR 的平均临床准确性在不同节段有所不同。最准确节段（提供 PR 参考点）的精度为 1.10mm。在与参考节段相邻的两个节段中，临床准确性恶化至 1.37mm 和 1.50mm。更远节段的精度更差。相比之下，AR 的不同节段的临床准确性没有显著差异。AR 的平均精度为 0.74mm，明显优于 PR 的最佳精度。
在导航辅助脊柱手术中，AR 的临床准确性优于 PR。
无。
