Evaluation of the precision of navigation-assisted endoscopy according to the navigation tool setup and the type of endoscopes.
Endoscopy
Navigation-assisted endoscopy
Neuroendoscopy
Neuronavigation
Neurosurgery
Journal
Acta neurochirurgica
ISSN: 0942-0940
Titre abrégé: Acta Neurochir (Wien)
Pays: Austria
ID NLM: 0151000
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 2022
09 2022
Historique:
received:
25
01
2022
accepted:
01
06
2022
pubmed:
29
6
2022
medline:
3
9
2022
entrez:
28
6
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Preoperative image-based neuronavigation-assisted endoscopy during intracranial procedures is gaining great interest. This study aimed to analyze the precision of navigation-assisted endoscopy according to the navigation setup, the type of optic and its working angulation. A custom-made box with four screws was referenced. The navigation-assisted endoscope was aligned on the screws (targets). The precision on the navigation screen was defined as the virtual distance-to-target between the tip of the endoscope and the center of the screws. Three modifiers were assessed: (1) the distance D between the box and the reference array (CLOSE 13 cm - MIDDLE 30 cm - FAR 53 cm), (2) the distance between the tip of the endoscope and the navigation array on the endoscope (close 5 cm - middle 10 cm - far 20 cm), (3) the working angulation of the endoscope (0°-endoscope and 30°-endoscope angled at 90° and 45° with the box). The median precision was 1.3 mm (Q1: 1.1; Q3: 1.7) with the best setting CLOSE/close. The best setting in surgical condition (CLOSE/far) showed a distance-to-target of 2.3 mm (Q1: 1.9; Q3: 2.5). The distance D was correlated to the precision (Spearman rho = 0.82), but not the distance d (Spearman rho = 0.04). The type of optic and its angulation with the box were also correlated to the precision (Spearman rho = - 0.37). The best setting was the use of a 30°-endoscope angled at 45° (1.4 mm (Q1: 1.0; Q3: 1.9)). Navigated-assisted endoscopy is feasible and offers a good precision. The navigation setup should be optimized, reducing the risk of inadvertent perifocal damage.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35764694
doi: 10.1007/s00701-022-05276-w
pii: 10.1007/s00701-022-05276-w
pmc: PMC9427865
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2375-2383Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Neurosurg Rev. 2012 Jul;35(3):351-8
pubmed: 22170178
World Neurosurg. 2019 May;125:e978-e983
pubmed: 30763750
World Neurosurg. 2013 Dec;80(6):709-16
pubmed: 23851232
Neurosurg Focus. 2021 Aug;51(2):E19
pubmed: 34333474
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2012 Sep;154(9):1663-7
pubmed: 22847726
Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2019 Oct;30(4):421-432
pubmed: 31471049
World Neurosurg. 2015 Dec;84(6):2053-8
pubmed: 26255242
J Craniofac Surg. 2021 Jul-Aug 01;32(5):1765-1769
pubmed: 34319680
J Neurosurg. 2001 Sep;95(3):541-3
pubmed: 11565885
Neurosurg Focus. 2021 Jan;50(1):E17
pubmed: 33386018
PLoS One. 2016 Jan 12;11(1):e0146996
pubmed: 26757365
Br J Neurosurg. 2014 Oct;28(5):606-10
pubmed: 24533591
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2017 Jun;159(6):1033-1041
pubmed: 28389876
Surg Neurol Int. 2021 Jun 14;12:279
pubmed: 34221610
Expert Rev Med Devices. 2005 May;2(3):351-73
pubmed: 16288598
Neurosurgery. 2002 Apr;50(4):797-801; discussion 802-3
pubmed: 11904031
Neurosurg Rev. 2022 Feb;45(1):199-216
pubmed: 34173114
Neurosurgery. 2009 May;64(5 Suppl 2):365-71; discussion 371-3
pubmed: 19404116
Neurosurgery. 2008 Feb;62 Suppl 2:575-97; discussion 597-8
pubmed: 18596446
Laryngoscope. 2014 Apr;124(4):853-9
pubmed: 24122916
Childs Nerv Syst. 2015 Aug;31(8):1327-33
pubmed: 25933601
Neurosurg Focus. 2014 Mar;36(3):E4
pubmed: 24580005
J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2021 Jul 23;28(4):439-449
pubmed: 34298514
Surg Neurol Int. 2021 Apr 14;12:160
pubmed: 33948330
Int J Med Robot. 2018 Apr;14(2):
pubmed: 29282850
Surg Neurol. 2007 Jun;67(6):572-8; discussion 578
pubmed: 17368519
World Neurosurg. 2015 Aug;84(2):580-4
pubmed: 25819528