ArticleAnnals of biomedical engineering2018
AngleNav: MEMS Tracker to Facilitate CT-Guided Puncture.
Article in Annals of biomedical engineering, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Image-Guided Robotics for Standardized and Automated Biopsy and Ablation.Seminars in interventional radiology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
As a low-cost needle navigation system, AngleNav may be used to improve the accuracy, speed, and ease of CT-guided needle punctures. The AngleNav hardware includes a wireless device with a microelectromechanical (MEMS) tracker that can be attached to any standard needle. The physician defines the target, desired needle path and skin entry point on a CT slice image. The accuracy of AngleNav was first tested in a 3D-printed calibration platform in a benchtop setting. An abdominal phantom study was then performed in a CT scanner to validate the accuracy of the device's angular measurement. Finally, an in vivo swine study was performed to guide the needle towards liver targets (n = 8). CT scans of the targets were used to quantify the angular errors and needle tip-to-targeting distance errors between the planned needle path and the final needle position. The MEMS tracker showed a mean angular error of 0.01° with a standard deviation (SD) of 0.62° in the benchtop setting. The abdominal phantom test showed a mean angular error of 0.87° with an SD of 1.19° and a mean tip-to-target distance error of 4.89 mm with an SD of 1.57 mm. The animal experiment resulted in a mean angular error of 6.6° with an SD of 1.9° and a mean tip-to-target distance error of 8.7 mm with an SD of 3.1 mm. These results demonstrated the feasibility of AngleNav for CT-guided interventional workflow. The angular and distance errors were reduced by 64.4 and 54.8% respectively if using AngleNav instead of freehand insertion, with a limited number of operators. AngleNav assisted the physicians to deliver accurate needle insertion during CT-guided intervention. The device could potentially reduce the learning curve for physicians to perform CT-guided needle targeting.
Indexed as
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.