Journal Article

Evaluation of the precision of navigation-assisted endoscopy according to the navigation tool setup and the type of endoscopes

Schaller, Karl, Bijlenga, Philippe, Chavaz, Lara, Davidovic, Alioucha, Momjian, Shahan, Meling, Torstein R, Haemmerli, Julien

2022

Overview

ObjectPreoperative image-based neuronavigation-assisted endoscopy during intracranial procedures is gaining great interest. This study aimed to analyze the precision of navigation-assisted endoscopy according to the navigation setup, the type of optic and its working angulation.MethodsA custom-made box with four screws was referenced. The navigation-assisted endoscope was aligned on the screws (targets). The precision on the navigation screen was defined as the virtual distance-to-target between the tip of the endoscope and the center of the screws. Three modifiers were assessed: (1) the distance D between the box and the reference array (CLOSE 13 cm – MIDDLE 30 cm – FAR 53 cm), (2) the distance between the tip of the endoscope and the navigation array on the endoscope (close 5 cm – middle 10 cm – far 20 cm), (3) the working angulation of the endoscope (0°-endoscope and 30°-endoscope angled at 90° and 45° with the box).ResultsThe median precision was 1.3 mm (Q1: 1.1; Q3: 1.7) with the best setting CLOSE/close. The best setting in surgical condition (CLOSE/far) showed a distance-to-target of 2.3 mm (Q1: 1.9; Q3: 2.5). The distance D was correlated to the precision (Spearman rho = 0.82), but not the distance d (Spearman rho = 0.04). The type of optic and its angulation with the box were also correlated to the precision (Spearman rho =  − 0.37). The best setting was the use of a 30°-endoscope angled at 45° (1.4 mm (Q1: 1.0; Q3: 1.9)).ConclusionNavigated-assisted endoscopy is feasible and offers a good precision. The navigation setup should be optimized, reducing the risk of inadvertent perifocal damage.

• Publisher: Springer Nature B.V
• Subject: Endoscopes / Endoscopy