Assessment of the accuracy of infrared and electromagnetic navigation using an industrial robot: Which factors are influencing the accuracy of navigation?
✍ Scribed by Emmanouil Liodakis; Kongfai Chu; Ralf Westphal; Christian Krettek; Musa Citak; Thomas Gosling; Mohamed Kenawey
- Publisher
- Elsevier Science
- Year
- 2011
- Tongue
- English
- Weight
- 987 KB
- Volume
- 29
- Category
- Article
- ISSN
- 0736-0266
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
✦ Synopsis
Abstract
Our objectives were to detect factors that influence the accuracy of surgical navigation (magnitude of deformity, plane of deformity, position of the navigation bases) and compare the accuracy of infrared with electromagnetic navigation. Human cadaveric femora were used. A robot connected with a computer moved one of the bony fragments in a desired direction. The bases of the infrared navigation (BrainLab) and the receivers of the electromagnetic device (Fastrak‐Pohlemus) were attached to the proximal and distal parts of the bone. For the first part of the study, deformities were classified in eight groups (e.g., 0 to 5^°^). For the second part, the bases were initially placed near the osteotomy and then far away. The mean absolute differences between both navigation system measurements and the robotic angles were significantly affected by the magnitude of angulation with better accuracy for smaller angulations (p < 0.001). The accuracy of infrared navigation was significantly better in the frontal and sagittal plane. Changing the position of the navigation bases near and far away from the deformity apex had no significant effect on the accuracy of infrared navigation; however, it influenced the accuracy of electromagnetic navigation in the frontal plane (p < 0.001). In conclusion, the use of infrared navigation systems for corrections of small angulation‐deformities in the frontal or sagittal plane provides the most accurate results, irrespectively from the positioning of the navigation bases. © 2011 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 29: 1476–1483, 2011