The Consistency Between the Preoperative 3D-Reconstructed Meckel’s Cave and the Intraoperative Balloon Results in Percutaneous Balloon Compression

Abstract

Objective

To predict the volume and shape of the balloon before PBC by reconstructing the Meckel’s cave (MC) and establishing a volumetric measurement model, supporting preoperative preparation and intraoperative decisions.

Methods

The clinical data of 31 patients with good therapeutic effects who underwent PBC are retrospectively collected, including preoperative MRI, the volume of contrast agent injected into the balloon, and intraoperative lateral X-ray images. The MC on the affected side of the 31 patients is reconstructed based on MRI using 3D Slicer, while the volume of the MC is calculated to compare with the volume of contrast agent. The width (W) and length (L) of the model of the MC in lateral view are measured and used to classify the shape of the MC based on W/L. The consistency between the W/L of the model of the MC and the W/L of the intraoperative balloon is evaluated.

Results

For volume, the mean value of the models of the MC (V₁) in 31 patients is 399.77±155.13 mm³, while the mean value of the contrast agent injected during PBC (V₂) is 539.03±111.93 mm³. The formula obtained by linear regression is V₂= 392.1 + 0.3676×V₁. Based on the value of W/L, the shape of the MC is classified into thin “pear” in 5 patients (16.13%), standard “pear” in 22 patients (70.97%), and square “pear” in 4 patients (12.90%). There is no significant difference in W/L between the models of the MC and the intraoperative balloons in 31 patients (P=0.221).

Conclusion

In 31 patients with good efficacy, it is verified that the prediction of the MC before PBC by 3D Slicer is consistent with the actual situation of the intraoperative balloon. This method can provide certain basis for preoperative preparation and intraoperative judgment.

Keywords:

• trigeminal neuralgia
• percutaneous balloon compression
• Meckel’s cave
• 3D Slicer
• reconstruction

Author Contributions

All authors made a significant contribution to the work reported, whether that is in the conception, study design, execution, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation, or in all these areas; took part in drafting, revising or critically reviewing the article; gave final approval of the version to be published; have agreed on the journal to which the article has been submitted; and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Disclosure

The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Additional information

Funding

This study was not funded.