Utility and efficacy of navigation system use in interventional radiology


Background: To ensure precision and accuracy during interventional radiologic (IR) procedures, navigation systems are utilized. There are four main categories of guidance systems that can be used to assist in IR procedures: optical system, electromagnetic (EM) tracking, Cone Bean Computer Tomography (CBCT) and Magnetic Navigation system. Objective: The purpose of this report is to examine some current medical literature to present an impression as to the state of navigation system use in interventional radiology. Methods: Three health databases were selected: Pubmed, Embase and OVID Medline, with the search terms “Interventional Radiology” and “Navigation System” being used. All included studies were presented in English. Studies were excluded if they did not pertain to navigation systems in interventional radiology, were in a language other than English, presented an abstract only or solely discussed interventional cardiology. Results: General themes emerged within the literature for the advantages of navigation system use including benefits to interventional radiologic procedures, increased patient accuracy and reduced procedure time and the potential for reduction in costs. Increased radiation exposure, problems accounting for respiratory motion and sterility remain issues for navigation system use. Conclusion: With potential to better standardize treatment using navigation systems, patients can have access to up-to-date technology for treatment. To ensure the highest standard of care, navigation systems should be used by interventional radiologists only. As indications and clinical efficacy are frequently being defined for navigation system use in interventional radiology, continual review of the published literature and large clinical trials for each system should be pursued.

Share and Cite:

Kaicker, J. and Athreya, S. (2013) Utility and efficacy of navigation system use in interventional radiology. Open Journal of Clinical Diagnostics, 3, 128-132. doi: 10.4236/ojcd.2013.33022.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] Wood, B.J., Kruecker, J., Abi-Jaoudeh, N., et al. (2010) Navigation systems for ablation. Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, 8, S257-S263. doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2010.05.003
[2] Coldwell, D.M. and Sewell, P.E. (2005) The expanding role of interventional radiology in the supportive care of the oncology patient: From diagnosis to therapy. Seminars in Oncology, 32, 169-173. doi:10.1053/j.seminoncol.2004.11.018
[3] Solomon, S.B. and Silverman, S.G. (2010) Imaging in Interventional Oncology. Radiology, 257, 624-640. doi:10.1148/radiol.10081490
[4] Kanazawa, S. (2012) Current status of interventional oncology. International Journal of Clinical Oncology, 17, 299-300. doi:10.1007/s10147-012-0440-6
[5] Bruners, P., Penzkofer, T., Nagel, M., Elfring, R., Gronloh, N., Schmitz-Rode, T., Gunther, R.W. and Mahnken, A.H. (2009). Electromagnetic tracking for CT-guided spine interventions: Phantom, ex-vivo and in-vivo results. European Radiology, 19, 990-994. doi:10.1007/s00330-008-1227-z
[6] Abi-Jaoudeh, N., Kruecker, J., Kadoury, S., et al. (2012) Multimodality image fusion-guided procedures: Technique, accuracy and application. CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology, 35, 986-998. doi:10.1007/s00270-012-0446-5
[7] Wood, B.J., Zhang, H., Durrani, A., Glossop, N., Ranjam, S., Lindisch, D., Levy, E., Banovac, F., Borgert, J., Krueger, S., Kruecker, J., Viswanathan, A. and Cleary, K. (2005) Navigation with electromagnetic tracking for interventional radiology procedures—A feasibility study. Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, 16, 493-505. doi:10.1097/01.RVI.0000148827.62296.B4
[8] Yaniv, Z. (2010) Evaluation of spherical fiducial localization in C-arm cone-beam CT using patient data. Medical Physics, 37, 5298-5305. doi:10.1118/1.3475941
[9] Schiemann, M., Killmann, R., Kleen, M., Abolmaali, N., Finney, J. and Vogl, T.J. (2004) Vascular guide wire navigation with a magnetic guidance system: Experimental results in a phantom. Radiology, 232, 475-481. doi:10.1148/radiol.2322030533
[10] Wallace, M.J., Gupta, S. and Hicks, M.E. (2005) Out-of-plane computed-tomography-guided biopsy using a magnetic-field-based navigation system. CVIR, 29, 108-113. doi:10.1007/s00270-005-0041-0
[11] Wah, T., Breen, D., Patel, J., et al. (2012) Interventional oncology. Radiography, 18, 15-20. doi:10.1016/j.radi.2011.10.001
[12] Hoffer, F.A. (2011) Interventional oncology: The future. Pediatric Radiology, 41, S201-S206. doi:10.1007/s00247-011-1990-x
[13] Schulze, D., Heiland, M., Thurmann, H. and Adam, G. (2004) Radiation exposure during midfacial imaging using 4 and 16 slice computed tomography, cone bean computed tomography systems and conventional radiography. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, 33, 83-86. doi:10.1259/dmfr/28403350

Copyright © 2023 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.