Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
BioMed Research International
Volume 2014, Article ID 904803, 7 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/904803
Research Article

Quality Assurance of Multiport Image-Guided Minimally Invasive Surgery at the Lateral Skull Base

1Chair for Metrology and Quality Management, RWTH Aachen University, Steinbachstr. 19, 52074 Aachen, Germany
2TU Darmstadt, Graphisch-Interaktive Systeme, Fraunhoferstr. 5, 64283 Darmstadt, Germany
3Hals-Nasen-Ohren-Klinik, Universitätsklinikums Düsseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225 Düsseldorf, Germany

Received 13 February 2014; Accepted 28 May 2014; Published 3 July 2014

Academic Editor: Stefan Weber

Copyright © 2014 Maria Nau-Hermes et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. S. Sauerland, T. Jaschinski, and E. A. Neugebauer, “Laparoscopic versus open surgery for suspected appendicitis,” Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, no. 10, Article ID CD001546, 2010. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. F. Keus, J. A. de Jong, H. G. Gooszen, and C. J. van Laarhoven, “Laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy for patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis,” The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, no. 4, Article ID CD006231, 2006. View at Google Scholar
  3. N. Gerber, B. Bell, K. Gavaghan, C. Weisstanner, M. Caversaccio, and S. Weber, “Surgical planning tool for robotically assisted hearing aid implantation,” International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 11–20, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. H. Hiraumi, N. Yamamoto, T. Sakamoto, and J. Ito, “A minimally invasive approach for cochlear implantation using a microendoscope,” European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, vol. 270, no. 2, pp. 477–481, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. B. Bell, C. Stieger, N. Gerber et al., “A self-developed and constructed robot for minimally invasive cochlear implantation,” Acta Oto-Laryngologica, vol. 132, no. 4, pp. 355–360, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. Y. Nguyen, M. Miroir, J. L. Vellin et al., “Minimally invasive computer-assisted approach for cochlear implantation: a human temporal bone study,” Surgical Innovation, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 259–267, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. R. F. Labadie, J. H. Noble, B. M. Dawant, R. Balachandran, O. Majdani, and J. M. Fitzpatrick, “Clinical validation of percutaneous cochlear implant surgery: initial report,” The Laryngoscope, vol. 118, no. 6, pp. 1031–1039, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. G. B. Wanna, R. Balachandran, O. Majdani, J. Mitchell, and R. F. Labadie, “Percutaneous access to the petrous apex in vitro using customized micro-stereotactic frames based on image-guided surgical technology,” Acta Oto—Laryngologica, vol. 130, no. 4, pp. 458–463, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, “Quality System Regulation,” Code of Federal Regulations Title 21, Chapter 1, Part 820, 2013.
  10. Bundesministerium der Justiz, Gesetz für Medizinprodukte, vol. 28, 2011.
  11. International Organization for Standardization, “Medical devices—application of risk managmenet to medical devices,” ISO 14971, 2013.
  12. J. S. Barkun, J. K. Aronson, L. S. Feldman, G. J. Maddern, and S. M. Strasberg, “Evaluation and stages of surgical innovations,” The Lancet, vol. 374, no. 9695, pp. 1089–1096, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. P. L. Ergina, J. A. Cook, J. M. Blazeby et al., “Challenges in evaluating surgical innovation,” The Lancet, vol. 374, no. 9695, pp. 1097–1104, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. P. McCulloch, D. G. Altmann, W. B. Campbell et al., “No surgical innvoation without evaluation: the IDEAL recommendations,” The Lancet, vol. 374, pp. 1105–1112, 2009. View at Google Scholar
  15. J. H. Noble, R. F. Labadie, R. H. Gifford, and B. M. Dawant, “Automatic determination of optimal linear drilling trajectories for cochlear access accounting for drill-positioning error,” International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 281–290, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  16. T. Pfeifer, “Quality management—strategies, methods, techniques,” Hanser, pp. 60–66, 2002. View at Google Scholar
  17. T. Prefi, Qualitätsorientierte Unternehmensführung [Habilitation thesis], P3—Ingenieurgesellschaft für Management und Organisation, 2003.
  18. T. Flore, “NetQGate—tool support for quality gate processes,” in Proceedings of the Conference on Quality Engineering in Software Technology (CONQUEST '06), Berlin, Germany, 2006.
  19. C. Hammers and R. Schmitt, “Governing the process chain of product development with an enhanced quality gate approach,” CIRP Journal of Manufacturing Science and Technology, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 206–211, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. M. Becker, M. Kirschner, and G. Sakas, “Segmentation of risk structures in the temporal bone using the Probabilistic Active Shape Model,” in Medical Imaging, vol. 9036 of Proceedings of SPIE, 2014.
  21. M. Becker, S. Hansen, S. Wesarg, and G. Sakas, “Path planning for multi-port lateral skull base surgery based on first clinical experiences,” in Clinical Image-Based Procedures. Translational Research in Medical Imaging, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 23–30, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2014. View at Google Scholar
  22. M. Nau, S. Pollmanns, and R. Schmitt, “Assessing the risk of minimally-invasive surgery: a metrological approach,” in Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of Metrology, pp. 1–5, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  23. M. Nau, S. Pollmanns, and R. Schmitt, “Uncertainty evaluation for surgical processes,” in Proceedings of the 11th International Symposium Seires on Measurement Technology and Intelligent Instruments (ISMTII '13), CD 07_14, 2013.
  24. P. David, D. Dementhon, R. Duraiswami, and H. Samet, “SoftPOSIT: simultaneous pose and correspondence determination,” International Journal of Computer Vision, vol. 59, no. 3, pp. 259–284, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. P. Markelj, D. Tomaževič, B. Likar, and F. Pernuš, “A review of 3D/2D registration methods for image-guided interventions,” Medical Image Analysis, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 642–661, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. B. M. Gillespie, W. Chaboyer, L. Thalib, M. John, N. Fairweather, and K. Slater, “Effect of using a safety checklist on patient complications after surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” Anesthesiology, vol. 120, no. 6, pp. 1380–1389, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar