ArticleRadiology research and practice2017
Application of Real-Time 3D Navigation System in CT-Guided Percutaneous Interventional Procedures: A Feasibility Study.
Article in Radiology research and practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Augmented reality and artificial intelligence-based navigation during percutaneous vertebroplasty: a pilot randomised clinical trial.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2020Trial
- Source-detector trajectory optimization for CBCT metal artifact reduction based on PICCS reconstruction.Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik · 2024Article
- Insights into Infusion-Based Targeted Drug Delivery in the Brain: Perspectives, Challenges and Opportunities.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Efficacy of Shadow-Based Needle Positioning System in Performing CT Image-Guided Percutaneous Biopsy of Lung Lesions: Our Initial Experience.The Indian journal of radiology & imaging · 2022Article
- Modular robotic platform for precision neurosurgery with a bio-inspired needle: System overview and first in-vivo deployment.PloS one · 2022Article
- Stereotactic navigation versus ultrasound guidance in placing IRE applicators in a liver phantom.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Electromagnetic Tracking and Optical Molecular Imaging Guidance for Liver Biopsy and Point-of-Care Tissue Assessment in Phantom and Woodchuck Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2021Article
- Accuracy of Electrode Placement in IRE Treatment with Navigated Guidance.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2021Article
- A Radiolucent Electromagnetic Tracking System for Use with Intraoperative X-ray Imaging.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Up-to-date intraoperative computer assisted solutions for liver surgery.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTo evaluate the accuracy of a quantitative 3D navigation system for CT-guided interventional procedures in a two-part study. MATERIALS AND
methodsTwenty-two procedures were performed in abdominal and thoracic phantoms. Accuracies of the 3D anatomy map registration and navigation were evaluated. Time used for the navigated procedures was recorded. In the IRB approved clinical evaluation, 21 patients scheduled for CT-guided thoracic and hepatic biopsy and ablations were recruited. CT-guided procedures were performed without following the 3D navigation display. Accuracy of navigation as well as workflow fitness of the system was evaluated.
resultsIn phantoms, the average 3D anatomy map registration error was 1.79 mm. The average navigated needle placement accuracy for one-pass and two-pass procedures, respectively, was 2.0 ± 0.7 mm and 2.8 ± 1.1 mm in the liver and 2.7 ± 1.7 mm and 3.0 ± 1.4 mm in the lung. The average accuracy of the 3D navigation system in human subjects was 4.6 mm ± 3.1 for all procedures. The system fits the existing workflow of CT-guided interventions with minimum impact.
conclusionA 3D navigation system can be performed along the existing workflow and has the potential to navigate precision needle placement in CT-guided interventional procedures.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.