Abstract
Purpose
Minimal invasion computer-assisted neurosurgical procedures with various tool insertions into the brain may carry hemorrhagic risks and neurological deficits. The goal of this study is to investigate the role of computer-based surgical trajectory planning tools in improving the potential safety of image-based stereotactic neurosurgery.
Methods
Multi-sequence MRI studies of eight patients who underwent image-guided neurosurgery were retrospectively processed to extract anatomical structures—head surface, ventricles, blood vessels, white matter fibers tractography, and fMRI data of motor, sensory, speech, and visual areas. An experienced neurosurgeon selected one target for each patient. Five neurosurgeons planned a surgical trajectory for each patient using three planning methods: (1) conventional; (2) visualization, in which scans are augmented with overlays of anatomical structures and functional areas; and (3) automatic, in which three surgical trajectories with the lowest expected risk score are automatically computed. For each surgeon, target, and method, we recorded the entry point and its surgical trajectory and computed its expected risk score and its minimum distance from the key structures.
Results
A total of 120 surgical trajectories were collected (5 surgeons, 8 targets, 3 methods). The surgical trajectories expected risk scores improved by 76 % (\(\hbox {SD} =11.6\,\%; p < 0.05\), two-sample student’s t test); the average distance of a trajectory from nearby blood vessels increased by 1.6 mm (\(\hbox {SD}=0.5, p < 0.05\)) from 0.6 to 2.2 mm (243 %). The initial surgical trajectories were changed in 85 % of the cases based on the expected risk score and the trajectory distance from blood vessels.
Conclusions
Computer-based patient-specific preoperative planning of surgical trajectories that minimize the expected risk of vascular and neurological damage due to incorrect tool placement is a promising technique that yields consistent improvements.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Grossman R, Sadetzki S, Spiegelmann R, Ram Z (2005) Hemorrhagic complications and the incidence of asymptomatic bleeding associated with stereotactic brain biopsy. Acta Neurochirurgica (Wien) 147:627–631
Kongham P, Knifed E, Tamber M, Bernstein M (2008) Complications in 622 cases of frame-based stereotactic biopsy, a decreasing procedure. Can J Neurol Sci 35:79–84
MacGirt M, Woodworth G, Coon A, Frazier J, Amundson E, Garonzik I, Olivi A, Weingart J (2005) Independent predictors of morbidity after image-guided stereotactic brain biopsy: a risk assessment of 270 cases. J Neurosurg 102:897–901
Zrinzo L, Foltynie T, Haritz M (2012) Reducing hemorrhagic complications in functional neurosurgery: a large case series and systematic literature review. J Neurosurg 116:84–94
Beriault S, Subaie FA, Collins DL, Sadikot AF, Pike GB (2012) A multi-modal approach to computer-assisted deep brain stimulation trajectory planning. Int J Comput Aid Radiol Surg 7(5):687–704
Bick AS, Mayer A, Levin A (2012) From research to clinical practice: Implementation of functional magnetic imaging and white matter tractography in the clinical environment. J Neurol Sci 312:158–165
Lee JD, Huang CH, Lee LT (2002) Improving stereotactic surgery using 3-D reconstruction. IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag 21:109–116
Navkar NV, Tsekos NV, Stafford JR, Weinberg JS, Deng Z (2010) Visualization and planning of neurosurgical interventions with straight access. In: Navab N, Jannin P (eds) Proceedings 1st international conference on information processing in computer-assisted interventions. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 6135. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–11
Brunenberg EJ, Vilanova A, Visser-Vandewalle V, Temel Y, Ackermans L, Platel B (2007) Automatic trajectory planning for deep brain stimulation: a feasibility study. In: Ayache N, Ourselin S (eds) Proceedings 10th international conference on medical image computation and computer assisted intervention. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 4791. Springer, Berlin, pp 584–592
Essert C, Haegelen C, Lalys F, Abadie A, Jannin P (2012) Automatic computation of electrode trajectories for Deep Brain Stimulation: a hybrid symbolic and numerical approach. Int J Comput Aid Radiol Surg 7(4):517–532
Liu L, Dawant, BM, Pallavaram S, Neimat JS, Konrad PE, D’Haese P, Datteri RD, Landman BA, Noble JH (2012) A surgeon specific automatic path planning algorithm for deep brain stimulation. Proc SPIE Conf 8316:83161A–83161D.
Shamir RR, Joskowicz L, Antiga L, Foroni RI, Shoshan (2010) Trajectory planning method for reduced patient risk in image-guided neurosurgery: concept and preliminary results. Proc SPIE Conf 7625:762520I–7625824
Shamir RR, Joskowicz L, Tamir I, Dabool E, Pertman L, Ben-Ami A, Shoshan Y (2012) Reduced risk trajectory planning in image-guided keyhole neurosurgery. Med Phys 39(5):2885–2895
Vaillant M, Davatzikos C, Taylor RH, Bryan RN (1997) a path-planning algorithm for image-guided neurosurgery. In: Troccaz LJ, Mosges R (eds) Proceedings of 1st joint conference on computer vision, virtual reality and robotics in medicine and medical robotics and computer-assisted surgery. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1205. Springer, Berlin, pp 467–476
De Momi E, Caborni C, Cardinale F, Casaceli G, Castana L, Cossu M, Mai R, Gozzo F, Francione S, Tassi L, Lo Russo G, Antiga L, Ferrigno G (2014) Multi-trajectories automatic planner for StereoElectroEncephaloGraphy (SEEG). Int J CARS (2014) 9:1087–1097. doi:10.1007/s11548-014-1004-1
Liu Y, Konrad P, Neimat J, Tatter S, Yu H, Datteri R, Landman B, Noble J, Pallavaram S, Dawant B, DHaese PF (2014) Multi-surgeon, multi-site validation of a trajectory planning algorithm for deep brain stimulation procedures. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 61(9):2479–2487. doi: 10.1109/TBME.2014.2322776
Zelmann R, Beriault S, Mok K, Haegelen C, Hall J, Pike GB, Olivier A, Collins DL (2014) Automatic optimization of depth electrode trajectory planning. In: Clinical image-based procedures translational research in medical imaging, pp 99–107
Rincon-Nigro M, Navkar NV, Tsekos NV, Zhigang D (2014) GPU-accelerated interactive visualization and planning of neurosurgical interventions. IEEE Comput Graph Appl 34(1):22–31
Shamir R R, Horn M, Blum T, Mehrkens J H, Shoshan Y, Joskowicz L and Navab N (2011) IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI) Trajectory planning with Augmented Reality for improved risk assessment in image-guided keyhole neurosurgery, pp 1873–1876
De Momi E, Carbonary C, Cardinale F, Castana L, Casaceli G, Cossu M, Antiga L, Ferrigno G (2013) Automatic trajectory planner for stereo electro encephalography procedures: a retrospective study. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 60:986–993
Zombori G, Rodinov M, Nowell M, Zuluaga MA, Clarkson MJ, Micallef C, Diehl B, Wehner T, Miserochi A, McEnvoy AW, Duncan JS, Ourselin, S (2014) A computer assisted planning system for the placement of sEEG electrodes in the treatment of epilepsy. In: Stoyanov D et al (eds) Proceedings of 5th international conference on information processing in computer-assisted interventions, IPCAI 2014, Fukuoka, Japan. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 8498, pp 118–127.
Berthold KP (1987) Closed-form solution of absolute orientation using unit quaternions. J Opt Soc Am 4(4):629–642
Wells WM III, Viola P, Atsumi H, Nakajima S, Kikinis R (1996) Multi-modal volume registration by maximization of mutual information. Med Image Anal 1(1):35–51
Shamir RR, Freiman M, Joskowicz L, Spektor S, Shoshan Y (2009) Surface-based facial scan registration in neuronavigation procedures: a clinical study. J Neurosurg 111(6):1201–1206
Lorensen WE, Cline HE (1987) Marching cubes: a high resolution 3D surface construction algorithm. Comput Graph 21(4):163–169
Yushkevich PA, Piven J, Hazlett HC, Smith RG, Ho S, Gee JC, Gerig G (2006) User-guided 3D active contour segmentation of anatomical structures: significantly improved efficiency and reliability. NeuroImage 31(3):1116–1128
Freiman M, Joskowicz L, Broide N, Natanzon M, Nammer E, Shilon O, Weizman L, Sosna J (2012) Carotid vasculature modeling from patient CT angiography studies for interventional procedures simulation. Int J Comput Aid Radiol Surg 7(2):799–812
MrVista: MATLAB\(^{\rm R}\) interface for analyzing functional and anatomical data. http://white.stanford.edu/newlm/index.php/MrVista. Accessed 18 June 2014
ConTrack: a probabilistic fiber-tracking algorithm. http://white.stanford.edu/newlm/index.php/ConTrack. Accessed 18 June 2014
Basser PJ, Pajevic S, Pierpaoli C, Duda J, Aldroubi A (2000) In vivo fiber tractography using DT-MRI data. Magn Reson Med 44:625–632
BrainVoyager QX: analysis and visualization of functional and structural magnetic resonance imaging data sets. http://www.brainvoyager.com. Accessed 18 Feb 2014
Friston KJ, Frith C, Frackowiak RSJ, Turner J (1995) Characterizing dynamic brain responses with fMRI: a multivariate approach. NeuroImage 2:166–172
ITK: The Insight Segmentation and Registration Toolkit. http://www.itk.org. Accessed 18 June 2014
MITK: The Medical Imaging Interaction. http://www.mitk.org. Accessed 18 June 2014
VTK: The Visualization Toolkit. http://www.vtk.org. Accessed 18 June 2014
ParaView: Open Source Scientific Visualization. http://www.paraview.org. Accessed 18 June 2014
MATLAB\(^{\rm R}\): Technical Computing. http://www.mathworks.com. Accessed 18 June 2014
Acknowledgments
Neurosurgeons Zvi Israel, Guy Rosenthal, Iddo Paldor, Fernando Ramirez and Shweiki Moatasim participated in this study.
Conflict of interest
None of the authors has any conflict of interest. The authors have no personal financial or institutional interest in any of the materials, software, or devices described in this article.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
A shorter and restricted version of this paper was orally presented at the 27th International Conference on Computer Aided Radiology and Surgery, Heidelberg, Germany, 2013.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Trope, M., Shamir, R.R., Joskowicz, L. et al. The role of automatic computer-aided surgical trajectory planning in improving the expected safety of stereotactic neurosurgery. Int J CARS 10, 1127–1140 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-014-1126-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-014-1126-5