Intraoperative portable CT-scanner based spinal navigation--a feasibility and safety study

Advances in the Resection and Reconstruction of Midfacial Tumors Through Computer Assisted Surgery

Curatively intended oncologic surgery is based on a residual-free tumor excision. Since decades, the surgeon’s goal of R0-resection has led to radical resections in the anatomical region of the midface because of the three-dimensionally complex anatomy where aesthetically and functionally crucial structures are in close relation. In some cases, this implied aggressive overtreatment with loss of the eye globe. In contrast, undertreatment followed by repeated re-resections can also not be an option. Therefore, the evaluation of the true three-dimensional tumor extent and the intraoperative availability of this information seem critical for a precise, yet substance-sparing tumor removal. Computer assisted surgery (CAS) can provide the framework in this context. The present study evaluated the beneficial use of CAS in the treatment of midfacial tumors with special regard to tumor resection and reconstruction. Therefore, 60 patients diagnosed with a malignancy of the upper jaw has been treated, 31 with the use of CAS and 29 conventionally. Comparison of the two groups showed a higher rate of residual-free resections in cases of CAS application. Furthermore, we demonstrate the use of navigated specimen taking called tumor mapping. This procedure enables the transparent, yet precise documentation of three-dimensional tumor borders which paves the way to a more feasible interdisciplinary exchange leading e.g. to a much more focused radiation therapy. Moreover, we evaluated the possibilities of primary midface reconstructions seizing CAS, especially in cases of infiltrated orbital floors. These cases needed reduction of intra-orbital volume due to the tissue loss after resection which could be precisely achieved by CAS. These benefits of CAS in midface reconstruction found expression in positive changes in quality of life. The present work was able to demonstrate that the area of oncological surgery of the midface is a prime example of interface optimization based on the sensible use of computer assistance. The fact that the system makes the patient transparent for the surgeon and the procedure controllable facilitates a more precise and safer treatment oriented to a better outcome.

A Review on Advances in Intra-operative Imaging for Surgery and Therapy: Imagining the Operating Room of the Future

With the advent of Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS), intra-operative imaging has become crucial for surgery and therapy guidance, allowing to partially compensate for the lack of information typical of MIS. This paper reviews the advancements in both classical (i.e. ultrasounds, X-ray, optical coherence tomography and magnetic resonance imaging) and more recent (i.e. multispectral, photoacoustic and Raman imaging) intra-operative imaging modalities. Each imaging modality was analyzed, focusing on benefits and disadvantages in terms of compatibility with the operating room, costs, acquisition time and image characteristics. Tables are included to summarize this information. New generation of hybrid surgical room and algorithms for real time/in room image processing were also investigated. Each imaging modality has its own (site- and procedure-specific) peculiarities in terms of spatial and temporal resolution, field of view and contrasted tissues. Besides the benefits that each technique offers for guidance, considerations about operators and patient risk, costs, and extra time required for surgical procedures have to be considered. The current trend is to equip surgical rooms with multimodal imaging systems, so as to integrate multiple information for real-time data extraction and computer-assisted processing. The future of surgery is to enhance surgeons eye to minimize intra- and after-surgery adverse events and provide surgeons with all possible support to objectify and optimize the care-delivery process.

Intraoperative Computed Tomography Versus 3D C-Arm Imaging for Navigated Spinal Instrumentation

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective case-series study and a retrospective analysis of historical patients for comparison of data.

OBJECTIVE

To compare accuracy and limitations of intraoperative computed tomography (iCT)- versus 3D C-arm-based spinal navigation for posterior pedicle screw implantation.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Despite the higher accuracy of navigated compared to non-navigated pedicle screw implantation, it remains a matter of debate whether the use of iCT imaging may further benefit navigated spinal instrumentation compared to more commonly used isocentric 3D C-arm imaging.

METHODS

Between 2013 and 2016, 1527 pedicle screws were implanted in 260 patients with iCT (1219 screws) or 3D C-arm (308 screws)-based spinal navigation. Screw positioning was intraoperatively assessed by a second iCT or 3D C-arm (intraoperative accuracy). If necessary, immediate intraoperative screw revision was performed. Thereafter, a third iCT or 3D C-arm scan was performed to confirm repositioning (final accuracy). Clinical and patient data, intraoperative screw assessability, and accuracy rates were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed by an independent observer.

RESULTS

Intraoperative CT permitted immediate intraoperative assessment of each implanted screw. In contrast, 39 of the screws visualized with 3D C-arm imaging were intraoperatively not clearly assessable. Regarding the overall precision, iCT and 3D C-arm navigation yielded a comparable intraoperative accuracy (iCT 94.7% vs 3D C-arm 89.4%) and immediate correction of misplaced screws was feasible with both modalities (final accuracy: iCT 95.4% vs 3D C-arm 91.6%). Regarding the region specific performance, however, iCT-based navigation yielded significantly higher final accuracy rates in the cervical (iCT 99.5% vs 3D C-arm 88.9%, P < 0.01) and thoracic (iCT 97.7% vs 3D C-arm 88.8%, P < 0.001) regions.

CONCLUSION

Both iCT and 3D C-arm-based spinal navigation provides high pedicle screw accuracy rates. Immediate screw assessability and placement accuracy in the cervical-thoracic spine, however, appear to be limited with intraoperative 3D C-arm imaging alone.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.