ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2024
Automatic image registration on intraoperative CBCT compared to Surface Matching registration on preoperative CT for spinal navigation: accuracy and workflow.
Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2024. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- The accuracy of navigated vs. robot-assisted pedicle screw placement in spine surgery: a retrospective single-centre comparative study.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 · 2026Article
- Laser scanning registration for knee arthroplasty.Bone & joint research · 2026Article
- Accuracy of a high-resolution augmented reality (AR) guidance system with novel 3D stereoscopic targeting for spinal surgery.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Article
- Contemporary Applications of Robotic Systems in Dental Implantology: A Review.International dental journal · 2026Review
- Fusing Prediction and Perception: Adaptive Kalman Filter-Driven Respiratory Gating for MR Surgical Navigation.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The accuracy of pedicle screw placement in thoracolumbar fractures: A comparative study of automated cone-beam CT-based navigation and conventional fluoroscopy.Brain & spine · 2026Article
- Accuracy of computer-assisted drilling of equine cervical vertebral bodies using a purpose-built cervical frame-An experimental cadaveric study.Veterinary surgery : VS · 2025Article
- Study protocol: the SPInal NAVigation (SPINAV) trial - comparison of augmented reality surgical navigation, conventional image-guided navigation, and free-hand technique for pedicle screw placement in spinal deformity surgery.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Automatic Image Registration Provides Superior Accuracy Compared with Surface Matching in Cranial Navigation.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Accuracy and efficiency of drilling trajectories with augmented reality versus conventional navigation randomized crossover trial.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSpinal navigation solutions have been slower to develop compared to cranial ones. To facilitate greater adoption and use of spinal navigation, the relatively cumbersome registration processes need to be improved upon. This study aims to validate a new solution for automatic image registration and compare it to a traditional Surface Matching method.
methodAdult patients undergoing spinal surgery requiring navigation were enrolled after providing consent. A registration matrix-Universal AIR (= Automatic Image Registration)-was placed in the surgical field and used for automatic registration based on intraoperative 3D imaging. A standard Surface Matching method was used for comparison. Accuracy measurements were obtained by comparing planned and acquired coordinates on the vertebrae.
resultsThirty-nine patients with 42 datasets were included. The mean accuracy of Universal AIR registration was 1.20 ± 0.42 mm, while the mean accuracy of Surface Matching registration was 1.94 ± 0.64 mm. Universal AIR registration was non-inferior to Surface Matching registration. Post hoc analysis showed a significantly greater accuracy for Universal AIR registration. In Surface Matching, but not automatic registration, user-related errors such as incorrect identification of the vertebral level were seen.
conclusionAutomatic image registration for spinal navigation using Universal AIR and intraoperative 3D imaging provided improved accuracy compared to Surface Matching registration. In addition, it minimizes user errors and offers a standardized workflow, making it a reliable registration method for navigated spinal procedures.
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.