Navigation with the Integration of Device Tracking and Medical Imaging

  • Lei Zhao
  • Ferenc A. Jolesz
Chapter

Abstract

In image-guided therapy, both medical imaging and device-tracking systems are key components in providing the spatial relationship of a patient and surgical or interventional tools for accurate targeting. Both medical imagers and device-tracking systems need to be integrated and be used for different clinical applications. There are many medical imaging modalities available. Different imaging modality has its unique features in providing anatomical or functional imaging information for a particular application. Different device-tracking method also has its own advantages and weaknesses. In this chapter, different imaging modalities that can be used for procedure guidance are introduced, and their distinctive features on image guidance are discussed. Different device-tracking techniques and their characteristics for image guidance integration are described. The principle of navigation by integrating an imaging modality and a device-tracking modality is then explained. In the end, a few typical combinations of the imaging modality and device-tracking integrated navigation are discussed.

Keywords

Microwave Respiration Assure Fluorodeoxyglucose 

Bibliography

  1. 1.
    Moche M, Trampel R, Kahn T, et al. Navigation concepts for MR image-guided interventions. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008;27:276–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schenck JF, Jolesz FA, Roemer PB, et al. Superconducting open configuration MRI system for image-guided therapy. Radiology. 1995;195:805–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Moriarty TM, Kikinis R, Jolesz FA, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging therapy: intraoperative MR imaging. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 1996;7(2):323–31.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jolesz FA. Future perspectives in intraoperative imaging. In: Bernays RL, Imhof HG, Yonekawa Y, editors. Intraoperative imaging in neurosurgery. MRI, CT, ultrasound. Wein/New York: Springer; 2003. p. 7–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cleary K, Peters TM. Image-guided interventions: technology review and clinical applications. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2010;12:119–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Reijnders K, Coppes MH, Hulzen ALJ. Image guided surgery: new technology for surgery of soft tissue and bone sarcomas. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2007;33:390–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lindseth F, Bang J, Lang T. A robust and automatic method for evaluating accuracy in 3-D ultrasound-based navigation. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2003;29(10):1439–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Glossop ND. Advantages of optical compared with electromagnetic tracking. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91 Suppl 1:23–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nafis C, Jensen V, von Jako R. Method for evaluating compatibility of commercial electromagnetic (EM) microsensor tracking systems with surgical and imaging tables. Proc SPIE 2008;6918:691820.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yaniv Z, Wilson E, Lindisch D, Cleary K. Electromagnetic tracking in the clinical environment. Med Phys. 2009;36:876–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rohling R, Gee A, Berman L. Three-dimensional spatial compounding of ultra-sound images. Med Image Anal. 1997;1:177–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rohling R, Gee A, Berman L. A comparison of freehand three-dimensional ultrasound reconstruction techniques. Med Image Anal. 1999;3:339–59.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Peters TM. Image-guidance for surgical procedures. Phys Med Biol. 2006;51:R505–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lei Zhao
    • 1
  • Ferenc A. Jolesz
    • 2
  1. 1.Symbow Medical Technology Co., Ltd.BeijingChina
  2. 2.National Center for Image Guided Therapy, Department of RadiologyBrigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical SchoolBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations