Publication: Validation of a New Method for 2D Fusion Imaging Registration in a System Prepared Only for 3D
Issued Date
2020-01-01
Resource Type
ISSN
15451550
15266028
15266028
Other identifier(s)
2-s2.0-85082649431
Rights
Mahidol University
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Journal of Endovascular Therapy. (2020)
Suggested Citation
Andreas Edsfeldt, Björn Sonesson, Helena Rosén, Marcelo H. Petri, Kiattisak Hongku, Timothy Resch, Nuno V. Dias Validation of a New Method for 2D Fusion Imaging Registration in a System Prepared Only for 3D. Journal of Endovascular Therapy. (2020). doi:10.1177/1526602820912223 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/54682
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Thesis
Title
Validation of a New Method for 2D Fusion Imaging Registration in a System Prepared Only for 3D
Abstract
© The Author(s) 2020. Purpose: To validate a new 2D-3D registration method of fusion imaging during aortic repair in a system prepared only for 3D-3D registration and to compare radiation doses and accuracy. Materials and Methods: The study involved 189 patients, including 94 patients (median age 70 years; 85 men) who underwent abdominal endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with 2D-3D fusion on an Artis zee imaging system and 95 EVAR patients (median age 70 years; 81 men) from a prior study who had 3D-3D registration done using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). For the 2D-3D registration, an offline CBCT of the empty operating table was imported into the intraoperative dataset and superimposed on the preoperative computed tomography angiogram (CTA). Then 2 intraoperative single-frame 2D images of the skeleton were aligned with the patient’s skeleton on the preoperative CTA to complete the registration process. A digital subtraction angiogram was done to correct any misalignment of the aortic CTA volume. Values are given as the median [interquartile range (IQR) Q1, Q3]. Results: The 2D-3D registration had an accuracy of 4.0 mm (IQR 3.0, 5.0) after bone matching compared with the final correction with DSA (78% within 5 mm). By applying the 2D-3D protocol the radiation exposure (dose area product) from the registration of the fusion image was significantly reduced compared with the 3D-3D registration [1.12 Gy∙cm2 (IQR 0.41, 2.14) vs 43.4 Gy∙cm2 (IQR 37.1, 49.0), respectively; p<0.001). Conclusion: The new 2D-3D registration protocol based on 2 single-frame images avoids an intraoperative CBCT and can be used for fusion imaging registration in a system originally designed for 3D-3D only. This 2D-3D registration protocol is accurate and leads to a significant reduction in radiation exposure.