Share Email Print
cover

Proceedings Paper

Comparison between skin-mounted fiducials and bone-implanted fiducials for image-guided neurosurgery
Author(s): Jennifer Rost; Steven S. Harris; James D. Stefansic; Karl Sillay; Robert L. Galloway
Format Member Price Non-Member Price
PDF $14.40 $18.00

Paper Abstract

Point-based registration for image-guided neurosurgery has become the industry standard. While the use of intrinsic points is appealing because of its retrospective nature, affixing extrinsic objects to the head prior to scanning has been demonstrated to provide much more accurate registrations. Points of reference between image space and physical space are called fiducials. The extrinsic objects which generate those points are fiducial markers. The markers can be broken down into two classifications: skin-mounted and bone-implanted. Each has distinct advantages and disadvantages. Skin-mounted fiducials require simply sticking them on the patient in locations suggested by the manufacturer, however, they can move with tractions placed on the skin, fall off and perhaps the most dangerous problem, they can be replaced by the patient. Bone implanted markers being rigidly affixed to the skull do not present such problems. However, a minor surgical intervention (analogous to dental work) must be performed to implant the markers prior to surgery. Therefore marker type and use has become a decision point for image-guided surgery. We have performed a series of experiments in an attempt to better quantify aspects of the two types of markers so that better informed decisions can be made. We have created a phantom composed of a full-size plastic skull [Wards Scientific Supply] with a 500 ml bag of saline placed in the brain cavity. The skull was then sealed. A skin mimicking material, DragonSkinTM [SmoothOn Company] was painted onto the surface and allowed to dry. Skin mounted fiducials [Medtronic-SNT] and bone-implanted markers [Z-Kat]were placed on the phantom. In addition, three additional bone-implanted markers were placed (two on the base of the skull and one in the eye socket for use as targets). The markers were imaged in CT and 4 MRI sequences (T1-weighted, T2 weighted, SPGR, and a functional series.) The markers were also located in physical space using an Optotrak 3020 [Northern Digital Inc]. Registrations between image space and physical space were performed and fiducial and target registration errors were determined. Finally the 5 bone-implanted makers which penetrated the skin were removed and a traction equivalent to 25% of the weight of the average human head was applied to the “skin” surface. Target and fiducial registrations were again performed.

Paper Details

Date Published: 5 May 2004
PDF: 7 pages
Proc. SPIE 5367, Medical Imaging 2004: Visualization, Image-Guided Procedures, and Display, (5 May 2004); doi: 10.1117/12.537768
Show Author Affiliations
Jennifer Rost, Yale Univ. (United States)
Steven S. Harris, Vanderbilt Univ. (United States)
James D. Stefansic, Vanderbilt Univ. (United States)
Karl Sillay, Vanderbilt Univ. (United States)
Robert L. Galloway, Vanderbilt Univ. (United States)


Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 5367:
Medical Imaging 2004: Visualization, Image-Guided Procedures, and Display
Robert L. Galloway, Editor(s)

© SPIE. Terms of Use
Back to Top