Phantom Study Investigating the Accuracy of Manual and Automatic Image Fusion with the GE Logiq E9: Implications for use in Percutaneous Liver Interventions.

Autor: Burgmans, Mark, Harder, J., Meershoek, Philippa, Berg, Nynke, Chan, Shaun, Leeuwen, Fijs, Erkel, Arian, Burgmans, Mark Christiaan, den Harder, J Michiel, van den Berg, Nynke S, Chan, Shaun Xavier Ju Min, van Leeuwen, Fijs W B, van Erkel, Arian R
Předmět:
Zdroj: CardioVascular & Interventional Radiology; Jun2017, Vol. 40 Issue 6, p914-923, 10p
Abstrakt: Purpose: To determine the accuracy of automatic and manual co-registration methods for image fusion of three-dimensional computed tomography (CT) with real-time ultrasonography (US) for image-guided liver interventions.Materials and Methods: CT images of a skills phantom with liver lesions were acquired and co-registered to US using GE Logiq E9 navigation software. Manual co-registration was compared to automatic and semiautomatic co-registration using an active tracker. Also, manual point registration was compared to plane registration with and without an additional translation point. Finally, comparison was made between manual and automatic selection of reference points. In each experiment, accuracy of the co-registration method was determined by measurement of the residual displacement in phantom lesions by two independent observers.Results: Mean displacements for a superficial and deep liver lesion were comparable after manual and semiautomatic co-registration: 2.4 and 2.0 mm versus 2.0 and 2.5 mm, respectively. Both methods were significantly better than automatic co-registration: 5.9 and 5.2 mm residual displacement (p < 0.001; p < 0.01). The accuracy of manual point registration was higher than that of plane registration, the latter being heavily dependent on accurate matching of axial CT and US images by the operator. Automatic reference point selection resulted in significantly lower registration accuracy compared to manual point selection despite lower root-mean-square deviation (RMSD) values.Conclusion: The accuracy of manual and semiautomatic co-registration is better than that of automatic co-registration. For manual co-registration using a plane, choosing the correct plane orientation is an essential first step in the registration process. Automatic reference point selection based on RMSD values is error-prone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Databáze: Complementary Index
Externí odkaz: