A comparative analysis of intensity-based 2D-3D registration for intraoperative use in pedicle screw insertion surgeries.
2D–3D
Capture range
Implant verification
Intensity-based
Pedicle screw
Registration
Spine
Journal
International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery
ISSN: 1861-6429
Titre abrégé: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101499225
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2019
Oct 2019
Historique:
received:
07
01
2019
accepted:
26
06
2019
pubmed:
12
7
2019
medline:
22
1
2020
entrez:
12
7
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Although multiple algorithms have been reported that focus on improving the accuracy of 2D-3D registration techniques, there has been relatively little attention paid to quantifying their capture range. In this paper, we analyze the capture range for a number of variant formulations of the 2D-3D registration problem in the context of pedicle screw insertion surgery. We tested twelve 2D-3D registration techniques for capture range under different clinically realistic conditions. A registration was considered as successful if its error was less than 2 mm and 2° in 95% of the cases. We assessed the sensitivity of capture range to a variety of clinically realistic parameters including: X-ray contrast, number and configuration of X-rays, presence or absence of implants in the image, inter-subject variability, intervertebral motion and single-level vs multi-level registration. Gradient correlation + Powell optimizer had the widest capture range and the least sensitivity to X-ray contrast. The combination of 4 AP + lateral X-rays had the widest capture range (725 mm This paper assessed capture range of a number of variants of intensity-based 2D-3D registration algorithms in clinically realistic situations (for the use in pedicle screw insertion surgery). We conclude that a registration approach based on the gradient correlation similarity and the Powell's optimization algorithm, using a minimum of two C-arm images, is likely sufficiently robust for the proposed application.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31292926
doi: 10.1007/s11548-019-02024-x
pii: 10.1007/s11548-019-02024-x
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1725-1739Références
IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 1998 Aug;17(4):586-95
pubmed: 9845314
Eur Spine J. 2017 Nov;26(11):2906-2916
pubmed: 28528479
J Biomech. 2008;41(1):155-64
pubmed: 17706656
J Spinal Disord Tech. 2006 Dec;19(8):547-53
pubmed: 17146296
World Neurosurg. 2014 Nov;82(5):866-71.e1-2
pubmed: 24954252
Eur Spine J. 2012 Feb;21(2):247-55
pubmed: 21901328
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2004 Feb;34(2):57-64
pubmed: 15029938
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2004 Apr 1;29(7):767-73
pubmed: 15087800
Med Phys. 2001 Jun;28(6):1024-32
pubmed: 11439472
Phys Med Biol. 2012 Sep 7;57(17):5485-508
pubmed: 22864366
Phys Med Biol. 2016 Apr 21;61(8):3009-25
pubmed: 26992245
Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2016 Dec;19(16):1693-1703
pubmed: 27161828
Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2018 Aug;13(8):1269-1282
pubmed: 29808466
IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2003 Nov;22(11):1417-26
pubmed: 14606675
Med Phys. 2006 Dec;33(12):4730-8
pubmed: 17278825
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1983 Jun;9(6):789-97
pubmed: 6863054
Phys Med Biol. 2008 Feb 21;53(4):967-83
pubmed: 18263952
Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2018 Aug;13(8):1257-1267
pubmed: 29633081
IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2016 May;35(5):1352-1363
pubmed: 26829785
Med Image Anal. 2012 Apr;16(3):642-61
pubmed: 20452269
Med Image Anal. 2015 Dec;26(1):108-19
pubmed: 26387052
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003 Jun;(411):86-94
pubmed: 12782863
Neurosurg Focus. 2011 Oct;31(4):E8
pubmed: 21961871
Med Image Anal. 2006 Feb;10(1):96-112
pubmed: 16150629
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012 Jan 15;37(2):E119-25
pubmed: 21673628