Benutzer: Gast  Login
Dokumenttyp:
Article; Journal Article
Autor(en):
Meine, Timo C; Hinrichs, Jan B; Werncke, Thomas; Afat, Saif; Biggemann, Lorenz; Bucher, Andreas; Büttner, Martina; Christner, Sara; Dethlefsen, Ebba; Engel, Hannes; Gerwing, Mirjam; Getzin, Tobias; Gräger, Stephanie; Gresser, Eva; Grunz, Jan-Peter; Harder, Felix; Heidenreich, Julius; Hitpaß, Lea; Jakobi, Kristina; Janisch, Michael; Kocher, Nadja; Kopp, Markus; Lennartz, Simon; Martin, Ole; Moher Alsady, Tawfik; Pamminger, Matthias; Pedersoli, Frederico; Piechotta, Paula Louise; Platz Batista da...     »
Titel:
Phantom study for comparison between computed tomography- and C-Arm computed tomography-guided puncture applied by residents in radiology.
Abstract:
PURPOSE:  Comparison of puncture deviation and puncture duration between computed tomography (CT)- and C-arm CT (CACT)-guided puncture performed by residents in training (RiT). METHODS:  In a cohort of 25 RiTs enrolled in a research training program either CT- or CACT-guided puncture was performed on a phantom. Prior to the experiments, the RiT's level of training, experience playing a musical instrument, video games, and ball sports, and self-assessed manual skills and spatial skills were recorded. Each RiT performed two punctures. The first puncture was performed with a transaxial or single angulated needle path and the second with a single or double angulated needle path. Puncture deviation and puncture duration were compared between the procedures and were correlated with the self-assessments. RESULTS:  RiTs in both the CT guidance and CACT guidance groups did not differ with respect to radiologic experience (p = 1), angiographic experience (p = 0.415), and number of ultrasound-guided puncture procedures (p = 0.483), CT-guided puncture procedures (p = 0.934), and CACT-guided puncture procedures (p = 0.466). The puncture duration was significantly longer with CT guidance (without navigation tool) than with CACT guidance with navigation software (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the puncture duration between the first and second puncture using CT guidance (p = 0.719). However, in the case of CACT, the second puncture was significantly faster (p = 0.006). Puncture deviations were not different between CT-guided and CACT-guided puncture (p = 0.337) and between the first and second puncture of CT-guided and CACT-guided puncture (CT: p = 0.130; CACT: p = 0.391). The self-assessment of manual skills did not correlate with puncture deviation (p = 0.059) and puncture duration (p = 0.158). The self-assessed spatial skills correlated positively with puncture deviation (p = 0.011) but not with puncture duration (p = 0.541). CONCLUSION:  The RiTs achieved a puncture deviation that was clinically adequate with respect to their level of training and did not differ between CT-guided and CACT-guided puncture. The puncture duration was shorter when using CACT. CACT guidance with navigation software support has a potentially steeper learning curve. Spatial skills might accelerate the learning of image-guided puncture. KEY POINTS:   · The CT-guided and CACT-guided puncture experience of the RiTs selected as part of the program "Researchers for the Future" of the German Roentgen Society was adequate with respect to the level of training.. · Despite the lower collective experience of the RiTs with CACT-guided puncture with navigation software assistance, the learning curve regarding CACT-guided puncture may be faster compared to the CT-guided puncture technique.. · If the needle path is complex, CACT guidance with navigation software assistance might have an advantage over CT guidance.. CITATION FORMAT: · Meine TC, Hinrichs JB, Werncke T et al. Phantom study for comparison between computed tomography- and C-Arm computed tomography-guided puncture applied by residents in radiology. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2022; 194: 272 - 280.
Zeitschriftentitel:
Rofo
Jahr:
2022
Band / Volume:
194
Heft / Issue:
3
Seitenangaben Beitrag:
272-280
Volltext / DOI:
doi:10.1055/a-1586-2733
PubMed:
http://view.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34794186
Print-ISSN:
1438-9029
TUM Einrichtung:
1145; 595; Institut für Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie
 BibTeX