Comparison of image quality of 3D ultrasound: motorized acquisition versus freehand navigated acquisition, a phantom study.

Autor: Bekedam NM; Department of Head and Neck Surgery and Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. n.bekedam@nki.nl.; Academic Centre of Dentistry Amsterdam, Vrije Universiteit, Gustav Mahlerlaan 3004, 1081 LA, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. n.bekedam@nki.nl., Karssemakers LHE; Department of Head and Neck Surgery and Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands., van Alphen MJA; Department of Head and Neck Surgery and Oncology, Verwelius 3D Lab, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands., van Veen RLP; Department of Head and Neck Surgery and Oncology, Verwelius 3D Lab, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands., Smeele LE; Department of Head and Neck Surgery and Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands., Karakullukcu MB; Department of Head and Neck Surgery and Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery [Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg] 2023 Sep; Vol. 18 (9), pp. 1649-1663. Date of Electronic Publication: 2023 May 27.
DOI: 10.1007/s11548-023-02934-x
Abstrakt: Purpose: Intra-operative assessment of resection margins during oncological surgery is a field that needs improvement. Ultrasound (US) shows the potential to fulfill this need, but this imaging technique is highly operator-dependent. A 3D US image of the whole specimen may remedy the operator dependence. This study aims to compare and evaluate the image quality of 3D US between freehand acquisition (FA) and motorized acquisition (MA).
Methods: Multiple 3D US volumes of a commercial phantom were acquired in motorized and freehand fashion. FA images were collected with electromagnetic navigation. An integrated algorithm reconstructed the FA images. MA images were stacked into a 3D volume. The image quality is evaluated following the metrics: contrast resolution, axial and elevation resolution, axial and elevation distance calibration, stability, inter-operator variability, and intra-operator variability. A linear mixed model determined statistical differences between FA and MA for these metrics.
Results: The MA results in a statistically significant lower error of axial distance calibration (p < 0.0001) and higher stability (p < 0.0001) than FA. On the other hand, the FA has a better elevation resolution (p < 0.003) than the MA.
Conclusion: MA results in better image quality of 3D US than the FA method based on axial distance calibration, stability, and variability. This study suggests acquiring 3D US volumes for intra-operative ex vivo margin assessment in a motorized fashion.
(© 2023. The Author(s).)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: