The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American). 2009;91:23-28.
doi:10.2106/JBJS.H.01362
© 2009 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
Advantages of Optical Compared with Electromagnetic Tracking
Neil D. Glossop, MEng, PhD1
1 Traxtal Technologies Inc., 49 Spadina Avenue, No. 310, Toronto, ON M5V 2J1, Canada. E-mail address: neil{at}traxtal.com
Disclosure: In support of his research for or preparation of this work, the author received, in any one year, outside funding or grants in excess of $10,000 from Traxtal Inc. In addition, the author or a member of his immediate family received, in any one year, payments or other benefits in excess of $10,000 or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a commercial entity (Traxtal Inc.). Also, a commercial entity (Traxtal Inc.) paid or directed in any one year, or agreed to pay or direct, benefits in excess of $10,000 to a research fund, foundation, division, center, clinical practice, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which the author, or a member of his immediate family, is affiliated or associated.
Tracking systems are critical to all types of computer-assisted image-guided intervention. Many technologies exist; however, only optical and electromagnetic systems are widely used commercially. In orthopaedic applications, optical systems dominate because of the large working volume and accuracy, but these systems suffer from deficiencies due to line of sight. Electromagnetic trackers can be made much smaller but are less accurate and are affected by metal, although current-generation systems are less affected by metal artifacts than were the earlier ones, which were more widely reported in the literature.

CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Facebook Technorati Twitter What's this?
|