Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

High-precision evaluation of electromagnetic tracking

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Navigation in high-precision minimally invasive surgery (HP-MIS) demands high tracking accuracy in the absence of line of sight (LOS). Currently, no tracking technology can satisfy this requirement. Electromagnetic tracking (EMT) is the best tracking paradigm in the absence of LOS despite limited accuracy and robustness. Novel evaluation protocols are needed to ensure high-precision and robust EMT for navigation in HP-MIS.

Methods

We introduce a novel protocol for EMT measurement evaluation featuring a high-accuracy phantom based on LEGO\(^{\circledR }\), which is calibrated by a coordinate measuring machine to ensure accuracy. Our protocol includes relative sequential positions and an uncertainty estimation of positioning. We show effects on distortion compensation using a learned interpolation model.

Results

Our high-precision protocol clarifies properties of errors and uncertainties of EMT for high-precision use cases. For EMT errors reaching clinically relevant 0.2 mm, our design is 5–10 times more accurate than previous protocols with 95% confidence margins of 0.02 mm. This high-precision protocol ensures the performance improvement in compensated EMT by 0.05 mm.

Conclusion

Our protocol improves the reliability of EMT evaluations because of significantly lower protocol-inherent uncertainties. To reduce patient risk in HP-MIS and to evaluate magnetic field distortion compensation, more high-accuracy protocols such as the one proposed here are required.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Franz AM, Haidegger T, Birkfellner W, Cleary K, Peters TM, Maier-Hein L (2014) Electromagnetic tracking in medicine: a review of technology, validation, and applications. IEEE TMI 33(8):1702–1725

    Google Scholar 

  2. Gudbjartsson H, Patz S (1995) The rician distribution of noisy MRI data. Magn Reson Med 34(6):910–914

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Haidegger T, Fenyvesi G, Sirokai B, Kelemen M, Nagy M, Takács B, Kovács L, Benyó B, Benyó Z (2011) Towards unified electromagnetic tracking system assessment-static errors. EMBC Proc 2011:1905–1908

    Google Scholar 

  4. Hummel J, Figl M, Birkfellner W, Bax MR, Shahidi R, Maurer CR, Bergmann H (2006) Evaluation of a new electromagnetic tracking system using a standardized assessment protocol. Phys Med Biol 51(10):N205–10

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Hummel JB, Bax MR, Figl ML, Kang Y, Maurer C, Birkfellner WW, Bergmann H, Shahidi R (2005) Design and application of an assessment protocol for electromagnetic tracking systems. MedPhys 32(7):2371–2379

    Google Scholar 

  6. Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology (2008) Evaluation of measurement data—guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement

  7. Kindratenko VV (2000) A survey of electromagnetic position tracker calibration techniques. Virtual Real 5(3):169–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Koivukangas T, Katisko JP, Koivukangas JP (2013) Technical accuracy of optical and the electromagnetic tracking systems. SpringerPlus 2(1):90–96

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Kügler D, Stefanov A, Mukhopadhyay A (2018) i3posnet: i9nstrument pose estimation from X-ray. arxiv:802.09575

  10. Labadie RF, Balachandran R, Mitchell J, Noble JH, Majdani O, Haynes D, Bennett M, Dawant BM, Fitzpatrick JM (2010) Clinical validation study of percutaneous cochlear access using patient customized micro-stereotactic frames. Otol Neurotol Off Publ Am Otol Soc Am Neurotol Soc Eur Acad Otol Neurotol 31(1):94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Lugez E, Sadjadi H, Pichora DR, Ellis RE, Akl SG, Fichtinger G (2015) Electromagnetic tracking in surgical and interventional environments: usability study. IJCARS 10(3):253–262

    Google Scholar 

  12. Maier-Hein L, Franz AM, Birkfellner W, Hummel J, Gergel I, Wegner I, Meinzer HP (2012) Standardized assessment of new electromagnetic field generators in an interventional radiology setting. MedPhys 39(6):3424–3434

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Reichl T, Gardiazabal J, Navab N (2013) Electromagnetic servoing-a new tracking paradigm. IEEE TMI 32(8):1526–1535

    Google Scholar 

  14. Rice SO (1945) Mathematical analysis of random noise. In: Wax N (ed) Selected papers on noise and stochastic processes. Dover Publications Inc., New York, pp 133–294

    Google Scholar 

  15. Sadjadi H, Hashtrudi-Zaad K, Fichtinger G (2016) Simultaneous electromagnetic tracking and calibration for dynamic field distortion compensation. IEEE TBME 63(8):1771–1781

    Google Scholar 

  16. Schipper J, Aschendorff A, Arapakis I, Klenzner T, Teszler CB, Ridder GJ, Laszig R (2004) Navigation as a quality management tool in cochlear implant surgery. JLO 118(10):764–770

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Sirokai B, Kiss M, Kovács L, Benyó B, Benyó Z, Haidegger T (2012) Best practice in electromagnetic tracking system assessment. In: II Proceedings of the joint workshop on new technologies for CRAS, vol 12, pp 1–4

  18. Sładek JA (2016) Coordinate metrology: accuracy of systems and measurements, 1st edn. Springer, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  19. Vakharia VN, Sparks R, O’Keeffe AG, Rodionov R, Miserocchi A, McEvoy A, Ourselin S, Duncan J (2017) Accuracy of intracranial electrode placement for stereoencephalography: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Epilepsia 58(6):921–932

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Wilson E, Yaniv Z, Zhang H, Nafis C, Shen E, Shechter G, Wiles AD, Peters T, Lindisch D, Cleary K (2007) A hardware and software protocol for the evaluation of electromagnetic tracker accuracy in the clinical environment: a multi-center study. In: SPIE proceedings, SPIE, p 65092T

  21. Wimmer W, Venail F, Williamson T, Akkari M, Gerber N, Weber S, Caversaccio M, Uziel A, Bell B (2014) Semiautomatic cochleostomy target and insertion trajectory planning for minimally invasive cochlear implantation. BioMed Res Int 2014:596498

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was partially funded by the German Research Foundation Grant No. (FE 431/13-2).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, Technischer Universität Darmstadt, Darmstadt, Germany

    David Kügler, Henry Krumb, Georgios Sakas & Anirban Mukhopadhyay

  2. WZL Aachen, RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany

    Judith Bredemann & Robert Schmitt

  3. ENT Clinic, University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany

    Igor Stenin, Julia Kristin, Thomas Klenzner & Jörg Schipper

Authors
  1. David Kügler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Henry Krumb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Judith Bredemann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Igor Stenin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Julia Kristin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Thomas Klenzner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Jörg Schipper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Robert Schmitt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Georgios Sakas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Anirban Mukhopadhyay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Kügler.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Research involving human participants and/or animals

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

This articles does not contain patient data.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kügler, D., Krumb, H., Bredemann, J. et al. High-precision evaluation of electromagnetic tracking. Int J CARS 14, 1127–1135 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-019-01959-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-019-01959-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation