Puncture Cube Patient-Mounted Navigation System Versus Freehand Method for CT-Guided Needle Placement: Study on a Neoprene Covered Elliptical Cylinder Gelatin Phantom

Overview

Journal Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol

Specialty Cardiology & Vascular Diseases

Date 2024 Jul 10

PMID 38987424

Authors

Joel Wessendorf

Michael Scheschenja

Moritz B Bastian

Tefta Gjini

Simon Viniol

Andreas Owczarek

Alexander M Konig

Jarmila Jedelska

Andreas H Mahnken

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: The study aims to show how the "Puncture Cube" (PC) (Medical Templates, Egg, Switzerland) compares to the freehand method (FHM) for CT-guided punctures.

Methods: The PC is a patient-mounted disassemblable cube consisting of an upper and lower template with multiple holes each to predefine puncture trajectory. A total of 80 punctures (FHM in-plane, FHM off-plane, PC in-plane, PC off-plane) was performed by 4 radiologists on a target 9.1 cm below surface level of a neoprene covered elliptical cylinder gelatin phantom. The PC was never disassembled. Evaluated parameters were procedure time, number of CT-scans, euclidean distance (ED) and normal distance (ND). Respective parameters of FHM and PC were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Levene test with significance levels of 5%.

Results: PC achieved smaller ED and ND values after initial needle insertion without corrections for both in-plane and off-plane punctures (P > 0.05). Variance of initial NDs was off-plane significantly larger for FHM. Final ED after needle path corrections was smaller for FHM both in- and off-plane (P < 0.05). Final off-plane ND was significantly lower for FHM with no significant difference in final in-plane ND. FHM off-plane punctures were significantly faster. There was no significant difference in CT-scans between both methods.

Conclusion: Utilizing the PC may improve initial needle positioning and safety especially off-plane. However, better final needle positioning after correction with the greater freedom of movement method may suggest need for disassembly of the cube.

References

Marel M, Padr R, Fila L, Rakita D, Mendez F, Capkova L . Biopsy of lung lesions under CT control. Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub. 2020; 165(4):390-394. DOI: 10.5507/bp.2020.040. View

Wessendorf J, Konig A, Heers H, Mahnken A . Repeat Percutaneous Radiofrequency Ablation of T1 Renal Cell Carcinomas is Safe in Patients with Von Hippel-Lindau Disease. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2021; 44(12):2022-2025. PMC: 8626382. DOI: 10.1007/s00270-021-02935-w. View

Nishikawa H, Inuzuka T, Takeda H, Nakajima J, Matsuda F, Sakamoto A . Comparison of percutaneous radiofrequency thermal ablation and surgical resection for small hepatocellular carcinoma. BMC Gastroenterol. 2011; 11:143. PMC: 3260104. DOI: 10.1186/1471-230X-11-143. View

Yang Y, Yu H, Tan X, You Y, Liu F, Zhao T . Liver resection versus radiofrequency ablation for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Hyperthermia. 2021; 38(1):875-886. DOI: 10.1080/02656736.2021.1933218. View

Vogl T, Nour-Eldin N, Hammerstingl R, Panahi B, Naguib N . Microwave Ablation (MWA): Basics, Technique and Results in Primary and Metastatic Liver Neoplasms - Review Article. Rofo. 2017; 189(11):1055-1066. DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-117410. View

Commander C, Wilson S, Bilaj F, Isaacson A, Burke C, Yu H . CT-Guided Percutaneous Drainage Catheter Placement in the Abdomen and Pelvis: Predictors of Outcome and Protocol for Follow-up. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2020; 31(4):667-673. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2019.09.026. View

Manchikanti L, Knezevic N, Navani A, Christo P, Limerick G, Calodney A . Epidural Interventions in the Management of Chronic Spinal Pain: American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP) Comprehensive Evidence-Based Guidelines. Pain Physician. 2021; 24(S1):S27-S208. View

Neuwersch-Sommeregger S, Kostenberger M, Stettner H, Pipam W, Breschan C, Feigl G . CT-Guided Coeliac Plexus Neurolysis in Patients with Intra-Abdominal Malignancy: A Retrospective Evaluation of 52 Palliative In-Patients. Pain Ther. 2021; 10(2):1593-1603. PMC: 8586091. DOI: 10.1007/s40122-021-00317-1. View

Park R, Lee S, Kim S, Park S, Choe J, Do K . Learning Curve for CT-Guided Percutaneous Transthoracic Needle Biopsy: Retrospective Evaluation Among 17 Thoracic Imaging Fellows at a Tertiary Referral Hospital. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2021; 218(1):112-123. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.21.26346. View

10.

Diepers M, Gruber P, Remonda L, Berberat J . Case report: Experience with the Cube Navigation System in complex access routes during CT-guided lumbosacral infiltration therapy. Front Surg. 2023; 10:1093964. PMC: 9971217. DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2023.1093964. View

11.

Scharll Y, Mitteregger A, Laimer G, Schwabl C, Schullian P, Bale R . Comparison of a Robotic and Patient-Mounted Device for CT-Guided Needle Placement: A Phantom Study. J Clin Med. 2022; 11(13). PMC: 9267795. DOI: 10.3390/jcm11133746. View

12.

Mokry A, Willmitzer F, Hostettler R, Richter H, Kircher P, Kneissl S . Evaluation of a novel, patient-mounted system for CT-guided needle navigation-an ex vivo study. Neuroradiology. 2018; 61(1):55-61. DOI: 10.1007/s00234-018-2107-0. View

13.

Grigoriadis S, Filippiadis D, Stamatopoulou V, Alexopoulou E, Kelekis N, Kelekis A . Navigation Guidance for Percutaneous Splanchnic Nerve Radiofrequency Neurolysis: Preliminary Results. Medicina (Kaunas). 2022; 58(10). PMC: 9607001. DOI: 10.3390/medicina58101359. View

14.

Krammer L, Hostettler R, Wetzel S . Evaluation of the Access Cube Patient-Mounted Navigation System for CT-Guided Percutaneous Needle Placement-A Phantom Study. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2023; 34(10):1809-1814. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2023.06.036. View