↓ Skip to main content

Registration using 3D-printed rigid templates outperforms manually scanned surface matching in image-guided temporal bone surgery

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
Title
Registration using 3D-printed rigid templates outperforms manually scanned surface matching in image-guided temporal bone surgery
Published in
International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery, June 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11548-016-1441-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Makoto Yamashita, Nozomu Matsumoto, Byunghyun Cho, Noritaka Komune, Shinya Onogi, Jongseung Lee, Jordan Bano, Tomohiko Akahoshi, Makoto Hashizume

Abstract

Image-guided surgery (IGS) for otological procedures requires minimal invasiveness and a high degree of accuracy. We have recently developed a noninvasive registration method, the Surface Template-Assisted Marker Positioning (STAMP) method, which uses a rigid template of the surface of the temporal bone. However, the STAMP method is not applicable when the bony surface is not exposed, such as in endoscopic surgery. Thus, we extended our research to apply the STAMP method onto the skin and tested its feasibility in this study. We designed a phantom made of a rigid box and soft material for the study. The target registration error (TRE) was measured at preset measuring points in the phantom. We modified the STAMP method to be applicable for use on the skin around the ears (S-STAMP). The same phantom was also registered using the conventional, manually scanned surface matching method. We compared the TRE after the different registration methods. The TRE after the S-STAMP registration method was significantly smaller than that of the conventional surface matching method at all error measurement points in the phantom. However, the TRE after the S-STAMP registration method was significantly larger than that of paired point registration using invasive fiducial markers. The S-STAMP method using a rigid template on the soft surface yields a significantly smaller TRE than that of conventional, manually scanned surface matching registration. This strategy provides an alternative option to improve the accuracy of IGS without loading patients with additional invasive procedures.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 18%
Researcher 7 18%
Student > Master 4 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 9 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 38%
Engineering 6 15%
Computer Science 3 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Neuroscience 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 12 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 June 2016.
All research outputs
#20,333,181
of 22,877,793 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery
#667
of 847 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#305,047
of 352,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery
#15
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,877,793 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 847 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 352,714 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.