Probe versus microscope: a comparison of different methods for image-to-patient registration

Computer-aided navigation is widely used in ENT surgery. The position of a surgical instrument is shown in the CT/MR images of the patient and can thus be a good support for the surgeon. The accuracy is highly dependent on the registration done prior to surgery. A microscope and a probe can both be used for registration and navigation, depending on the surgical intervention. A navigation system typically only reports the fiducial registration error after paired-point registration. However, the target registration error (TRE)—a measurement for the accuracy in the surgical area—is much more relevant. The aim of this work was to compare the performance of a microscope relative to a conventional probe-based approach with different registration methods.

In this study, optical tracking was used to register a plastic skull to its preoperative CT images with paired-point registration. Anatomical landmarks and skin-affixed markers were used as fiducials and targets. With both microscope and probe, four different registration methods were evaluated based on their TREs at 10 targets. For half of the experiments, a surface registration and/or external fiducials were used additionally to paired-point registration to study their influence to accuracy.

Overall, probe registration leads to a smaller TRE (\(1.69 \pm 0.74\,\hbox {mm}\)) than registration with a microscope (\(2.19 \pm 0.94\,\hbox {mm}\)). Additional surface registration does not result in better accuracy of navigation for microscope and probe. The lowest mean TRE for both pointers can be achieved with paired-point registration only and radiolucent markers.

Our experiments showed that a probe used for registration and navigation achieves lower TREs compared using a microscope. Neither additional surface registration nor additional fiducials on an external reference element are necessary for improved accuracy of navigated ENT surgery on a plastic skull.