Compromised Accuracy of Stereotactic Target Delineation Associated with Computed Tomography-Based Frame Registration: A Comparative Analysis of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Computed Tomography Fusion.
Junhyung Kim, Sunwoo Jang, Seok Ho Hong, Sang Ryong Jeon
{"title":"Compromised Accuracy of Stereotactic Target Delineation Associated with Computed Tomography-Based Frame Registration: A Comparative Analysis of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Computed Tomography Fusion.","authors":"Junhyung Kim, Sunwoo Jang, Seok Ho Hong, Sang Ryong Jeon","doi":"10.1159/000534999","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Recent advancements in stereotactic neurosurgical techniques have become increasingly reliant on image-based target planning. We devised a case-phantom comparative analysis to evaluate the target registration errors arising during the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-computed tomography (CT) image fusion process.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>For subjects whose preoperative MRI and CT images both contained fiducial frame localizers, we investigated discrepancies in target coordinates derived from frame registration based on either MRI or CT. We generated a phantom target through an image fusion process, merging the framed CT images with their corresponding reference MRIs after masking their fiducial indicators. This phantom target was then compared with the original during each instance of target planning.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In our investigative study with 26 frame registrations, a systematic error in the y-axis was observed as -0.89 ± 0.42 mm across cases using either conventional CT and/or cone-beam CT (O-arm). For the z-axis, errors varied on a case-by-case basis, recording at +0.64 ± 1.09 mm with a predominant occurrence in those merged with cone-beam CT. Collectively, these errors resulted in an average Euclidean error of 1.33 ± 0.93 mm.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings suggest that the accuracy of frame-based stereotactic planning is potentially compromised during MRI-CT fusion process. Practitioners should recognize this issue, underscoring a pressing need for strategies and advancements to optimize the process.</p>","PeriodicalId":22078,"journal":{"name":"Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery","volume":" ","pages":"24-32"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000534999","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROIMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Recent advancements in stereotactic neurosurgical techniques have become increasingly reliant on image-based target planning. We devised a case-phantom comparative analysis to evaluate the target registration errors arising during the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-computed tomography (CT) image fusion process.
Methods: For subjects whose preoperative MRI and CT images both contained fiducial frame localizers, we investigated discrepancies in target coordinates derived from frame registration based on either MRI or CT. We generated a phantom target through an image fusion process, merging the framed CT images with their corresponding reference MRIs after masking their fiducial indicators. This phantom target was then compared with the original during each instance of target planning.
Results: In our investigative study with 26 frame registrations, a systematic error in the y-axis was observed as -0.89 ± 0.42 mm across cases using either conventional CT and/or cone-beam CT (O-arm). For the z-axis, errors varied on a case-by-case basis, recording at +0.64 ± 1.09 mm with a predominant occurrence in those merged with cone-beam CT. Collectively, these errors resulted in an average Euclidean error of 1.33 ± 0.93 mm.
Conclusion: Our findings suggest that the accuracy of frame-based stereotactic planning is potentially compromised during MRI-CT fusion process. Practitioners should recognize this issue, underscoring a pressing need for strategies and advancements to optimize the process.
期刊介绍:
''Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery'' provides a single source for the reader to keep abreast of developments in the most rapidly advancing subspecialty within neurosurgery. Technological advances in computer-assisted surgery, robotics, imaging and neurophysiology are being applied to clinical problems with ever-increasing rapidity in stereotaxis more than any other field, providing opportunities for new approaches to surgical and radiotherapeutic management of diseases of the brain, spinal cord, and spine. Issues feature advances in the use of deep-brain stimulation, imaging-guided techniques in stereotactic biopsy and craniotomy, stereotactic radiosurgery, and stereotactically implanted and guided radiotherapeutics and biologicals in the treatment of functional and movement disorders, brain tumors, and other diseases of the brain. Background information from basic science laboratories related to such clinical advances provides the reader with an overall perspective of this field. Proceedings and abstracts from many of the key international meetings furnish an overview of this specialty available nowhere else. ''Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery'' meets the information needs of both investigators and clinicians in this rapidly advancing field.