 |
|
Frameless Optical Computer-Aided Tracking of a Microscope for Otorhinology and Skull Base Surgery
Guoyan Zheng, PhD;
Marco Caversaccio, MD;
Richard Bächler, PhD;
Frank Langlotz, PhD;
Lutz-Peter Nolte, PhD;
Rudolf Häusler, MD
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001;127:1233-1238.
ABSTRACT
| |
Objectives To integrate a digitally controlled operating microscope without a laser
autofocus system into a frameless optical computer-aided surgery system and
to test the accuracy and usability of this system in otorhinological surgery.
Design Experimental study and case series.
Setting Department of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Inselspital,
and the Maurice E. Müller Institute for Biomechanics, University of Bern,
Bern, Switzerland.
Patients Eight computer-aided microscopic surgical procedures were performed
between January and October 2000 on patients with various diseases of the
anterior and lateral skull base.
Results The practical accuracy of the navigated microscope on the lateral side
of a cadaver skull was 2.27 ± 0.25 mm and on the anterior side of the
same skull was 2.07 ± 0.35 mm. In all 8 cases of computer-aided microscopic
surgery, no complications occurred. Clinical inaccuracy was 2 to 3 mm.
Conclusion Integration of a low-cost, non–laser autofocus microscope into
our computer-aided surgery system was successfully performed and offers surgeons
the ability to combine the precise optics of the operating microscope with
the localization power of a computer-aided system.
INTRODUCTION
THE TECHNOLOGY for computer-aided surgery (CAS) and indications for
its use in otorhinolaryngologic (ORL) practice have emerged in the past 10
years.1-3 Ultrasonic,
electromechanical, electromagnetic, and optoelectronic guiding systems have
been proposed to support the surgeon's 3-dimensional intraoperative orientation
and to prevent complications. These systems allow the surgeon to reach targets
without direct visual control. Combined with anatomical information obtained
from magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography (CT), and angiography,
CAS offers a safe and minimally invasive approach to the treatment of skull
base lesions. In general, 3 major components are common to CAS systems. (1)
The real object is that part of the anatomy to be approached surgically. In
the case of ORL surgery, this is the skull. (2) A virtual object is any kind
of image representing the real object and allowing for better insight into
its interior. Computed tomographic scans are commonly used for this purpose
in ORL surgery, but magnetic resonance images and angiography may serve as
the virtual object as well. (3) The navigator is an aiming device that guides
the surgeon to a point in the real object that was defined in the virtual
object.
Today, most of the demanding procedures in ORL surgery require the aid
of the operating microscope. In microsurgery, in which use of a specially
designed operating microscope allows for the performance of controlled tissue
removal under improved lighting and magnification, there is a great need for
online information about patient anatomy and the orientation and position
of a surgical tool. However, the microscope and handheld navigation instruments
cannot be used at the same time.4 Because of
the size of the microscope and its sterile cover, the space between the instruments
and the optoelectronic digitizer is shadowed. To measure without removing
the microscope from the surgical field, it must be used as a localizing instrument
itself.4
In this article, we propose an effective method for integrating a digitally
controlled microscope into a frameless optical CAS system in a theoretical
and practical trial. A bracket with light-emitting diodes (LEDs) is attached
to the microscope, and a specially designed calibration tool is used to calibrate
the microscope's focal point precisely. During surgery, the focal plane and
trajectory of the microscope are tracked by the optical tracking system in
real time, and the information is correlated with the preoperative scan images
and updated interactively. The intraoperative video image from the operating
microscope is displayed side by side with cropped slices of preoperative scan
images.
PATIENTS, MATERIALS, AND METHODS
Informed consent was obtained from all patients; however, the study
was classified as exempt by the local institutional review board.
OPTICAL CAS SYSTEM
The CAS system (SurgiGATE ORL; Medivision, Synthes-Stratec Medical,
Oberdorf, Switzerland), developed by a research group in Bern, Switzerland,
is based on CT scans.5 The images are saved
in a digital archiving system by means of a network or are directly transferred
to the computer in the operating room (Sun Workstation [Unix]; Sun Microsystems,
Mountain View, Calif). The frameless optical tracking system used in the operating
room included an optoelectronic space digitizer (OPTOTRAK 3020; Northern Digital
Inc, Waterloo, Ontario) as the passive navigation device. The precalibrated
system can track up to 256 pulsed infrared LEDs with an accuracy of 0.1 mm.
Three or more LEDs can be defined to represent a rigid body to be followed
globally with respect to the camera's frame of reference or locally with respect
to any other rigid body. Each surgical instrument carries a shield with 4
LEDs to form a rigid body that defines the tracked instrument's pose (position
and orientation) and its graphical representation through points of interest
(eg, the tool tip and the tool axis). This optical tracking system allows
the surgeon to get online spatial and geometrical information about any surgical
instrument in use.
MATCHING STRATEGIES
Matching, or registration, is defined as the transformation between
the real and virtual objects and is a critical aspect in most CAS applications.
Two different methods were developed and evaluated by our group6:
(1) a paired point–matching algorithm, which determines the relation
between both objects by a number of discrete points given in both worlds,
and (2) a surface-matching algorithm that does not use any fiducial markers.
This registration method uses 15 to 18 points captured by the surgeon with
a space pointer to represent the patient's anatomical features. The first
3 points correspond to anatomical landmarks defined in the CT images, eg,
the frontozygomatic suture, the nasion, and the anterior nasal spine for the
anterior skull base. These so-called coarse landmarks do not need to be captured
precisely—as much as 20 mm of error is accepted. The remaining points
lie on the bony surface of the skull and are referred to as surface points.
The coarse landmark pairs are used to get an initial estimate of the transformation
and to restrict the matching algorithm to the area of the correct solution.
The surface points are used to search a fine solution of the transformation.
In our study on the lateral skull base, we recommended that the following
5 anatomical points be selected for paired point matching with our navigation
system: the tip of the mastoid, the mastoid foramen, the umbo, the frontozygomatic
suture, and the anterior nasal spine. For additional accuracy in clinical
situations, surface matching is recommended.6
REFERENCING
During an image-guided intervention, it is necessary to compensate for
any relative motion between the patient and the localizer. If this were not
done, then the registration would become invalid as soon as either the patient
or the localizer moved. For marker-based surgical instrument localization,
the common technique to achieve referencing is the attachment of a dynamic
reference base to the patient's anatomical features before registration. The
dynamic reference base establishes a local frame of reference for the bone
to be operated on. With the aid of this device, the localizer can collect
the position data of navigated instruments with respect to the anatomical
features, thus neutralizing eventual patient and localizer motion. In our
computer-aided microscopic surgery system, the dynamic reference base is positioned
on the head of the intubated patient. It consists of an upper jaw (maxilla)
splint equipped with a rod and is attached to the jaw by means of silicone
impression material of medium consistency (Coltène, Altstätten,
Switzerland). The rod is equipped with LEDs. If the patient is edentulous,
then the same splint with a silicone mass is needed. In addition, we fix the
splint using 1 to 2 miniscrews (diameter, 2.0 mm; length, 12-14 mm) (Synthes-Stratec
Medical) on the hard palate.5 The miniscrews
are left on until the end of surgery.
OPERATING MICROSCOPE
The operating microscope used in this work consists of a digitally controlled
operating microscope and a floor stand (models VM900 and FS3013, respectively;
Möller-Wedel GmbH, Wedel, Germany). It provides a communication interface
for navigational systems to read or send commands and variables about all
movements of the operating microscope, such as the moving distance of the
focal point and the zooming scale. A camera is used to capture the video image.
The video output of the camera is connected to a television monitor and to
a standard frame grabber (MultiMedia Access Corporation, Cary, NC) installed
in the workstation.
To integrate the digitally controlled operating microscope into a CAS
system, the following specifications have been established:
- Conforms to the cleanliness and sterilization standards for equipment
in the operating room.
- Does not interfere with normal operative procedures or limit the
surgeon's access to the operative field.
- Does not interfere with the surgeon's use of the CAS system with
all other existing CAS tools.
- As a new CAS tool, should require minimum alteration of the existing
CAS system and should be compatible with other CAS tools.
- Requires minimum alterations in the operating microscope and its
floor stand, none of which should void the microscope's warranty.
To achieve these objectives, we developed a special bracket that is
mounted on the operating microscope frame and that holds a shield with 4 LEDs
(Figure 1). In designing this device,
care was taken so that the operating microscope was attached as rigidly as
possible. At the same time, the shield must not be occluded by any part of
the operating microscope and the floor stand so that the 4 LEDs can always
be seen by the optical tracking system. These LEDs establish a local coordinate
system for the microscope that defines the operating microscope as a traceable
rigid body. This computer-aided microscopic system can be guided by a virtual
keyboard.7
|
|
|
|
Figure 1. A, A bracket with a simple shield
of infrared diodes. B, The operating microscope equipped with the bracket
holding a shield of 4 infrared diodes that must be detected by the optical
tracking system.
|
|
|
CALIBRATION OF THE MICROSCOPE
At a particular zooming scale, the focal point in any position is rigidly
fixed to the frame of the operating microscope. Therefore, after rigidly attaching
a shield with 4 LEDs on the frame of the microscope to establish a local coordinate
system for the microscope, it is possible, through a calibration procedure,
to find the position of the focal point in this coordinate system. Later,
with the help of the optical tracking system, we can transform this position
to the coordinate system defined by the dynamic reference base and finally
to the image space with a matching transformation.
A special tool has been designed to calibrate the operating microscope
(Figure 2). The basic principle
is to solve a linear equation between the steps that the focal point has moved
and the coordinate of this focal point in the local coordinate system of the
microscope. Later, no matter where the focal point is and based on the steps
that the focal point has moved, we can calculate its corresponding spatial
coordinate in this local coordinate system based on the linear equation.
|
|
|
|
Figure 2. Operating microscope focal point
calibration tool, which is also equipped with a simple shield of 4 infrared
diodes that are detected by the optical tracking system. Of 2 mechanically
aligned crosshairs, the center of the bottom crosshair is selected as the
calibration point. Each time, the operating microscope focuses on this point
through the center of the top crosshair so that in the microscope view, the
center of the top crosshair is superimposed onto that of the bottom crosshair.
|
|
|
During calibration, in nonspecified varied distances between the microscope
and the calibration tool, we focus the microscope on the center of the bottom
crosshair of the calibration tool through the center of the top crosshair.
The position of the bottom center in the local coordinate system of calibration
is known before calibration. We retrieve the steps each time that the focal
point has moved from the microscope itself and the coordinates of the bottom
center in the microscope's local coordinate system from the optical tracking
system. Based on these data, we can calculate the coefficients that define
the linear relationship.
MEASUREMENT
Accuracy measurements were performed on a cadaver skull model and in
8 patients undergoing ORL microsurgery for a variety of diseases. The euclidean
distance was used. Microsoft Excel 97 (Microsoft Corp, Redmond, Wash) was
used for evaluation of the data.
Cadaver Skull
A needle pointer with a tip diameter of 0.5 mm was used. The calibration
unit defines the point of interest (eg, the tool tip, axis, and orientation)
accurately and checks the tool geometry by a simple point comparison. We used
this pointer and the calibrated microscope to digitize the same landmark point
on the skull model. System accuracy was assessed by measuring the deviations
between the digitized results, where one is the output from the needle pointer
and the other is based on the microscope. Two sets of points were chosen as
measuring points from different anatomical areas of the skull (Figure 3 and Figure 4)
that correspond to areas that commonly undergo ORL surgery. One is on the
anterior skull side and the other is on the lateral skull side.
|
|
|
|
Figure 3. The 11 landmarks on the anterior
skull base that are used for measuring system accuracy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 4. The 11 landmarks on the lateral
skull base that are used for measuring system accuracy.
|
|
|
Patients
In our preliminary clinical evaluation, 8 patients were treated on the
anterior and lateral skull base (for recurrent polyposis nasi [n = 3], frontal
recess stenosis (n = 2), osteoma of the frontal recess [n = 1], or ear malformation
[n = 2]) with our computer-aided microscopic surgery system based on paired
and surface matching. During surgical planning, either an axial CT scan of
the skull (sectional thickness, 1.5 mm; spacing, 1.5 mm) or a helical scan
was performed. Reliable anatomical paired points were then marked on the CT
scan, such as in the case of the anterior skull base, the frontozygomatic
sutures, the nasion, and the anterior nasal spine. Neither fixation of the
head with frames nor insertion of invasive markers is needed. In addition,
possible surgical trajectories (paths to the target and goals) can be identified.
During microsurgery, after focusing the microscope on an anatomical
area, the needle pointer was used to point to the same position. The positions
of the microscope's focal point and the needle pointer tip were transformed
to image space, and the deviation between the 2 points in image space was
calculated. The deviation was then measured in multiples of the pixel size
of the CT images.
RESULTS
CADAVER SKULL
The deviation errors for points in different anatomical areas are shown
in Figure 5 and Figure 6. In the lateral assay, a mean ± SD error of 2.27
± 0.25 mm (range, 1.96-2.71 mm) was determined. The upper confidence
limit (P>.95) was 2.76 mm. In the anterior assay,
the mean ± SD error was 2.07 ± 0.35 mm (range, 1.77-3.07 mm),
and the upper confidence limit was 2.76 mm.
|
|
|
|
Figure 5. Results of testing the microscope's
accuracy in the anterior skull base. Each landmark was tested 20 times.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 6. Results of testing the microscope's
accuracy in the lateral skull base. Each landmark was tested 20 times.
|
|
|
We also observed that although the mean error on the lateral skull base
was slightly larger than that on the anterior skull base, the SD on the lateral
skull was slightly smaller than that on the anterior skull. This is probably
because the landmarks selected on the lateral skull base were more densely
located in almost the same plane, whereas the landmarks on the anterior skull
were more sparsely distributed spatially in different planes. This also explains
why the maximal value on the anterior skull side was larger than that on the
lateral skull side, although the mean value on the lateral skull side was
smaller. This point has been verified by our clinical testing.
PATIENTS
In all 8 patients who underwent computer-aided microscopic surgery,
no complications occurred. However, a problem remains, ie, the focal level
in the case of bleeding, in which the deviation error is higher (>3.0 mm).
COMMENT
Several methods have been proposed previously for integrating the operating
microscope into the CAS system. Different technical approaches have been used
clinically, such as passive mechanical arms,8
active robotic arms,9 and ultrasonic,10 electromagnetic,11
and optical digitizing4, 12-13
systems. Currently, 3-dimensional digitizers based on optical sensor technology
are supposed to be the most accurate systems because they are less affected
by disturbing environmental factors than are the others. Furthermore, in contrast
to mechanical arms, they allow an unobstructed view of the surgical site and
a straightforward surgical procedure in the operative field.
Our proposed method is somewhat similar to that used by Hauser and colleagues4, 12-13 in that we both used
an optical digitizing system to track the microscope. However, the main difference
between the system used by Hauser and colleagues and ours is that a stereotactic
frame is required in their system as a patient registration and reference
system, which is often disadvantageous for ORL surgery. In their system, the
frame is mounted transitorily 1 day before surgery for CT acquisition. On
the day of surgery, the frame is repositioned on the patient's head. Our system
is frameless. We use software technology to solve the registration problem.
In addition, in their system, the shield holding the LEDs is mounted to the
housing of the microscope, and an object distance-measuring unit is attached
in front of the objective lens. In our system, the shield holding the LEDs
is mounted to the frame of the microscope, and no other unit is required.
The moving distance of the focal point is retrieved from the microscope itself.
Compared with other surgical instruments, the non–laser autofocus
microscope is less accurate. In our previous study,5
the practical accuracy for other surgical instruments on the cadaver skull
was 0.5 to 1.2 mm, whereas the mean ± SD error for the microscope was
2.07 ± 0.35 mm on the anterior skull and 2.27 ± 0.25 mm on the
lateral skull. These larger spatial errors can probably be attributed to the
following factors: (1) The instrument's trajectory is defined by its origin
and tip as the rigid end of the longitudinal axis. In contrast to the geometrically
predefined tip of the instrument, the microscope's focal point and associated
optical trajectory must be localized by surgeons because an operating microscope
without a laser autofocus system is used. Different surgeons will have different
focal levels. The large range of individual visual adaptation of the surgeons
makes it difficult to determine the exact focal point of the microscope. (2)
Errors can be introduced directly by the microscope and are referred to as
errors caused by the optical properties of the microscope, such as the method
of focal point adjustment, focal length, and magnification of the lens. (3)
Errors can be introduced indirectly by the microscope and are referred to
as errors caused by tracking properties of the microscope, such as the tracking
distance, the number of the reference infrared diodes, and the area covered
by these infrared diodes. (4) The condition when intraoperatively tracking
the microscope can be different from the condition when calibrating the microscope,
such as microscope orientation, tilt, or rotation. (5) The anatomical structures
in the microscopic surgical site can affect accuracy, in that the more spatially
sparse the distribution of the anatomical structures in the surgical site,
the less accurate the microscope.
Clinically, we found that a problem remains. The inaccuracy of the focal
level is greater than 3 mm in the case of bleeding. Because of the well-vascularized
mucosa of the nose, it is common to find such a situation. On the lateral
skull base, the soft tissue is not as thick as in the nose, except in chronic
inflammation. In addition, the bleeding is usually less than in the nose,
except for in well-vascularized tumors. This means that microscopic navigation
on the bone of the lateral skull base with an exact navigation level of the
focal point can be more accurate in clinical practice. The handling of the
navigation microscope with only a shield of infrared diodes (Figure 1) is not impaired. The Möller-Wedel microscope is a
low-cost system (US $40 000) compared with other microscopes. However,
it has the disadvantage of being a non–laser autofocus system.
In conclusion, a new method has been proposed to successfully integrate
a low-cost non–laser autofocus operating microscope into a CAS system
without interfering with the surgical procedure and changing any existing
CAS tools. It offers surgeons the ability to combine the precise optics of
the operating microscope with the localization power of the CAS.
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Accepted for publication June 27, 2001.
Presented in part at the 4th European Congress of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology,
Head and Neck Surgery, Berlin, Germany, May 18, 2000.
Corresponding author and reprints: Marco Caversaccio, MD, Department
of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital, Freiburgstrasse,
CH-3010 Bern, Switzerland (e-mail: marco.caversaccio{at}insel.ch).
From the Department of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery,
University Hospital (Inselspital) (Drs Zheng, Caversaccio, and Häusler),
and the Maurice E. Müller Institute for Biomechanics (Drs Zheng, Bächler,
Langlotz, and Nolte), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland. The authors have
no financial interest in any of the equipment mentioned, and no monetary compensation
was received from the manufacturers.
REFERENCES
| |
1. Schlöndorff G, Mosges R, Meyer-Ebrecht D, Krybus W, Adams L. CAS (computer assisted surgery): a new procedure in head and neck surgery
[in German]. HNO. 1989;37:187-190.
ISI
| PUBMED
2. Mann W, Klimek L. Indications for computer-assisted surgery in otorhinolaryngology. Comput Aided Surg. 1998;3:194-201.
PUBMED
3. Gunkel AR, Freysinger W, Thumfart WF. Experience with various 3-dimensional navigation systems in head and
neck surgery. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2000;126:390-395.
FREE FULL TEXT
4. Westermann B, Trippel M, Reinhardt H. Optically-navigable operating microscope for image-guided surgery. Minim Invasive Neurosurg. 1995;38:112-116.
PUBMED
5. Caversaccio M, Bächler R, Lädrach K, Schroth G, Nolte LP, Häusler R. The "Bernese" frameless optical computer aided surgery system. Comput Aided Surg. 1999;4:328-334.
PUBMED
6. Caversaccio M, Zulliger D, Bächler R, Nolte LP, Häusler R. Practical aspects for optimal registration (matching) on the lateral
skull base with an optical frameless computer-aided pointer system. Am J Otol. 2000;21:863-870.
PUBMED
7. Visarius H, Gong J, Scheer C, Haralamb S, Nolte LP. Man-machine interfaces in computer assisted surgery. Comput Aided Surg. 1997;2:102-107.
PUBMED
8. Kelly PJ, Alker GJ Jr, Goerss S. Computer-assisted stereotactic microsurgery for the treatment of intracranial
neoplasms. Neurosurgery. 1982;10:324-331.
PUBMED
9. Giorgi C, Eisenberg H, Costi G, Gallo E, Garibotto G, Casolino DS. Robot-assisted microscope for neurosurgery. J Image Guid Surg. 1995;1:158-163.
PUBMED
10. Roberts DW, Strohbehn JW, Hatch JF, Murray W, Kettenberger H. A frameless stereotaxic integration of computerized tomographic imaging
and the operating microscope. J Neurosurg. 1986;65:545-549.
PUBMED
11. Friets EM, Strohbehn JW, Hatch JF, Roberts DW. A frameless stereotaxic operating microscope for neurosurgery. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1989;36:608-667.
PUBMED
12. Hauser R, Westermann B, Probst R. Noninvasive tracking of patient's head movements during computer-assisted
intranasal microscopic surgery. Laryngoscope. 1997;107:491-499.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
13. Hauser R, Westermann B. Optical tracking of a microscope for image-guided intranasal sinus
surgery. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1999;108:54-62.
PUBMED
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLE
Archives of Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery Reader's Choice: Continuing Medical Education
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001;127(10):1289-1291.
FULL TEXT
|
