Download PDF
J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg 2014; 75(05): 365-370
DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1358607
Original Article
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Frameless Nonstereotactic Image-Guided Surgery of Supratentorial Lesions: Introduction to a Safe and Inexpensive Technique

Giorgio Callovini
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Santo Spirito Hospital, Rome, Italy
,
Shahram Sherkat
2   Department of Neurosurgery, San Filippo Neri Hospital, Rome, Italy
,
Gemma Callovini
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Santo Spirito Hospital, Rome, Italy
,
Roberto Gazzeri
3   Department of Neurosurgery, San Giovanni-Addolorata Hospital, Rome, Italy
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

06 March 2012

28 June 2013

Publication Date:
25 February 2014 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background We describe a simple, safe, and inexpensive technique that through the comparison of three-dimensional (3D)-rendered magnetic resonance (MR) images and real anatomy allows us to navigate and remove brain lesions, including those without cortical appearance, by direct recognition of anatomical landmarks. Preoperative planning no longer requires the use of fiducials and can therefore be performed out a stereotactic setting.

Methods MR Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine format scans of 93 patients were reconstructed using MRIcro freeware for their three-dimensional rendering (3DR). The main location of the lesions was rolandic or left temporal, and most of them were without cortical appearance (78%). The two-dimensional (2D) sets of images were processed by the software to perform a 3DR, thus obtaining a virtual model of the patient's head. Using the same 2D sets, the edges of the lesion's images were contoured by the region of interest (ROI) tool. In the next step, the ROI was projected onto the surface of the virtual model of the patient's head, thus helping to attain the best identification of the craniotomy area. MRIcro automatic segmentation function, the Brain Extraction Tool (BET), provides a clear 3DR of the cortical surface. We used BET to display gyri, sulci, and perilesional vessels to have further anatomical landmarks to guide the surgical approach.

Results The lesions were accessed through an optimally suited craniotomy. The visual matching of the cortical surface with reconstructed 3D images of the cortex permitted a fast localization of cortical and subcortical lesions. The major limitation is the depth of a lesion deeper than 3 cm. In these cases, the use of frame-based or frameless techniques still seems safer and more advantageous.

Conclusions The shape recognition of the cortical landmarks was not biased by brain distortion because the sulci and cortical vessels almost always had a relationship to each other that was not modified by edema or cerebrospinal fluid leakage. This 3DR allows us to reconstruct a virtual anatomy in an easy, portable, and inexpensive way. In selected cases, this technique represents a valid and safe alternative to the use of costly neuronavigation tools and is potentially helpful in developing countries.

Keywords

image-guided surgery - MRIcro - cortical sulci - neuronavigation - stereotaxy
 

  • References

  • 1 Anil SM, Kato Y, Hayakawa M, Yoshida K, Nagahisha S, Kanno T. Virtual 3-dimensional preoperative planning with the dextroscope for excision of a 4th ventricular ependymoma. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2007; 50 (2) 65-70
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Iseki H, Masutani Y, Iwahara M , et al. Volumegraph (overlaid three-dimensional image-guided navigation). Clinical application of augmented reality in neurosurgery. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg 1997; 68 (1–4 Pt 1) 18-24
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Masutani Y, Dohi T, Yamane F, Iseki H, Takakura K. Augmented reality visualization system for intravascular neurosurgery. Comput Aided Surg 1998; 3 (5) 239-247
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Marescaux J, Rubino F, Arenas M, Mutter D, Soler L. Augmented-reality-assisted laparoscopic adrenalectomy. JAMA 2004; 292 (18) 2214-2215
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Baltuch GH, Grady MS. Virtual reality technology in neurosurgery. US Neurological Disease 2006; 52-54
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Callovini GM, Sherkat S, Rinaldi A, Santucci N, Gazzeri G. Stereotactic-guided microsurgical removal of lesions without cortical appearance planned by three-dimensional CT reconstruction: limits and advantages of the frame-based technique. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 1998; 41 (4) 187-193
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Dwarakanath S, Suri A, Sharma BS, Mahapatra AK. Neuronavigation in a developing country: a pilot study of efficacy and limitations in intracranial surgery. Neurol India 2007; 55 (2) 111-116
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Schiffbauer H. Neuronavigation in brain tumor surgery. Clinical beta-phase of the Oulu Neuronavigator System Acta Universitatis Ouluensis Medica. Available at: http://herkules.oulu.fi/issn03553221/
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Stadie AT, Reisch R, Kockro RA , et al. Minimally invasive cerebral cavernoma surgery using keyhole approaches—solutions for technique-related limitations. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2009; 52 (1) 9-16
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Esposito V, Paolini S, Morace R , et al. Intraoperative localization of subcortical brain lesions. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2008; 150 (6) 537-542 ; discussion 543
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Roberts DW, Hartov A, Kennedy FE, Miga MI, Paulsen KD. Intraoperative brain shift and deformation: a quantitative analysis of cortical displacement in 28 cases. Neurosurgery 1998; 43 (4) 749-758 ; discussion 758–760
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Zele T, Matos B, Knific J, Bajrović FF, Prestor B. Use of 3D visualisation of medical images for planning and intraoperative localisation of superficial brain tumours: our experience. Br J Neurosurg 2010; 24 (5) 555-560
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Rorden C, Brett M. Stereotaxic display of brain lesions. Behav Neurol 2000; 12 (4) 191-200
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Lovo EE, Quintana JC, Puebla MC , et al. A novel, inexpensive method of image coregistration for applications in image-guided surgery using augmented reality. Neurosurgery 2007; 60 (4) (Suppl. 02) 366-371 ; discussion 371–372
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Kikinis R, Gleason PL, Moriarty TM , et al. Computer-assisted interactive three-dimensional planning for neurosurgical procedures. Neurosurgery 1996; 38 (4) 640-649 ; discussion 649–651
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Roessler K, Ungersboeck K, Aichholzer M , et al. Image-guided neurosurgery comparing a pointer device system with a navigating microscope: a retrospective analysis of 208 cases. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 1998; 41 (2) 53-57
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Sipos EP, Tebo SA, Zinreich SJ, Long DM, Brem H. In vivo accuracy testing and clinical experience with the ISG Viewing Wand. Neurosurgery 1996; 39 (1) 194-202 , discussion 202–204
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Dorward NL, Alberti O, Velani B , et al. Postimaging brain distortion: magnitude, correlates, and impact on neuronavigation. J Neurosurg 1998; 88 (4) 656-662
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Spetzger U, Hubbe U, Struffert T , et al. Error analysis in cranial neuronavigation. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2002; 45 (1) 6-10
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Willems PW, Taphoorn MJ, Burger H, Berkelbach van der Sprenkel JW, Tulleken CA. Effectiveness of neuronavigation in resecting solitary intracerebral contrast-enhancing tumors: a randomized controlled trial. J Neurosurg 2006; 104 (3) 360-368
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Stadie AT, Kockro RA, Reisch R , et al. Virtual reality system for planning minimally invasive neurosurgery. Technical note. J Neurosurg 2008; 108 (2) 382-394
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Aydin K, Cokluk C, Kuruoglu E , et al. Using the magnetic resonance three-dimensional volume rendering for tissues technique in the planning of craniotomy flaps with linear scalp incision. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2006; 49 (4) 189-193
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Esposito V, Paolini S, Morace R. Resection of a left insular cavernoma aided by a simple navigational tool. Technical note. Neurosurg Focus 2006; 21 (1) e16
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Sánchez González F, Domitrovic L, Funes T , et al. Planeamiento neuroquirùrgico informàtico: resultados con su utilizacion. Rev Argent Neuroc 2009; 23: 9-14
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Wick W, Stupp R, Beule AC , et al; European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer and the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. A novel tool to analyze MRI recurrence patterns in glioblastoma. Neuro Oncol 2008; 10 (6) 1019-1024
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Kikuta K, Takagi Y, Fushimi Y , et al. “Target bypass”: a method for preoperative targeting of a recipient artery in superficial temporal artery-to-middle cerebral artery anastomoses. Neurosurgery 2008; 62 (6) (Suppl. 03) 1434-1441
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Ward NS, Brown MM, Thompson AJ, Frackowiak RS. Neural correlates of motor recovery after stroke: a longitudinal fMRI study. Brain 2003; 126 (Pt 11) 2476-2496
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Park JS, Chung MS, Chi JG, Park HS, Shin DS. Segmentation of cerebral gyri in the sectioned images by referring to volume model. J Korean Med Sci 2010; 25 (12) 1710-1715
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Maciunas RJ, Galloway Jr RL, Latimer JW. The application accuracy of stereotactic frames. Neurosurgery 1994; 35 (4) 682-694 ; discussion 694–695
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Galloway Jr RL, Maciunas RJ, Latimer JW. The accuracies of four stereotactic frame systems: an independent assessment. Biomed Instrum Technol 1991; 25 (6) 457-460
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Brommeland T, Hennig R. Mechanical accuracy of a new stereotactic guide. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2000; 142 (4) 449-454
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Nakajima S, Atsumi H, Kikinis R , et al. Use of cortical surface vessel registration for image-guided neurosurgery. Neurosurgery 1997; 40 (6) 1201-1208 ; discussion 1208–1210
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Woerdeman PA, Willems PW, Noordmans HJ, Tulleken CA, van der Sprenkel JW. Application accuracy in frameless image-guided neurosurgery: a comparison study of three patient-to-image registration methods. J Neurosurg 2007; 106 (6) 1012-1016
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Lindner D, Trantakis C, Renner C , et al. Application of intraoperative 3D ultrasound during navigated tumor resection. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2006; 49 (4) 197-202
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Unsgaard G, Ommedal S, Muller T, Gronningsaeter A, Nagelhus Hernes TA. Neuronavigation by intraoperative three-dimensional ultrasound: initial experience during brain tumor resection. Neurosurgery 2002; 50 (4) 804-812 ; discussion 812
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Sosna J, Barth MM, Kruskal JB, Kane RA. Intraoperative sonography for neurosurgery. J Ultrasound Med 2005; 24 (12) 1671-1682
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Sæther CA, Torsteinsen M, Torp SH, Sundstrøm S, Unsgård G, Solheim O. Did survival improve after the implementation of intraoperative neuronavigation and 3D ultrasound in glioblastoma surgery? A retrospective analysis of 192 primary operations. J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg 2012; 73 (2) 73-78
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar