Purpose To characterize the radiation dose and three‐dimensional (3D) imaging performance of a recently developed mobile, isocentric C‐arm equipped with a flat‐panel detector (FPD) for intraoperative cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) (Cios Spin 3D, Siemens Healthineers) and to identify potential improvements in 3D imaging protocols for pertinent imaging tasks. Methods The C‐arm features a 30 × 30 cm2 FPD and isocentric gantry with computer‐controlled motorization of rotation (0–195°), angulation (±220°), and height (0–45 cm). Geometric calibration was assessed in terms of 9 degrees of freedom of the x‐ray source and detector in CBCT scans, and the reproducibility of geometric calibration was evaluated. Standard and custom scan protocols were evaluated, with variation in the number of projections (100–400) and mAs per view (0.05–1.65 mAs). Image reconstruction was based on 3D filtered backprojection using “smooth,” “normal,” and “sharp” reconstruction filters as well as a custom, two‐dimensional 2D isotropic filter. Imaging performance was evaluated in terms of uniformity, gray value correspondence with Hounsfield units (HU), contrast, noise (noise‐power spectrum, NPS), spatial resolution (modulation transfer function, MTF), and noise‐equivalent quanta (NEQ). Performance tradeoffs among protocols were visualized in anthropomorphic phantoms for various anatomical sites and imaging tasks. Results Geometric calibration showed a high degree of reproducibility despite ~19 mm gantry flex over a nominal semicircular orbit. The dose for a CBCT scan varied from ~0.8–4.7 mGy for head protocols to ~6–38 mGy for body protocols. The MTF was consistent with sub‐mm spatial resolution, with f10 (frequency at which MTF = 10%) equal to 0.64 mm−1, 1.0 mm−1, and 1.5 mm−1 for smooth, standard, and sharp filters respectively. Implementation of a custom 2D isotropic filter improved CNR ~ 50–60% for both head and body protocols and provided more isotropic resolution and noise characteristics. The NPS and NEQ quantified the 3D noise performance and provided a guide to protocol selection, confirmed in images of anthropomorphic phantoms. Alternative scan protocols were identified according to body site and task — for example, lower‐dose body protocols (<3 mGy) sufficient for visualization of bone structures. Conclusion The studies provided objective assessment of the dose and 3D imaging performance of a new C‐arm, offering an important basis for clinical deployment and a benchmark for quality assurance. Modifications to standard 3D imaging protocols were identified that may improve performance or reduce radiation dose for pertinent imaging tasks.

Purpose A multi-stage image-based 3D-2D registration method is presented that maps annotations in a 3D image (e.g., point labels annotating individual vertebrae in preoperative CT) to an intraoperative radiograph in which the patient has undergone non-rigid anatomical deformation due to changes in patient positioning or due to the intervention itself. Methods The proposed method (termed msLevelCheck) extends a previous rigid registration solution (LevelCheck) to provide an accurate mapping of vertebral labels in the presence of spinal deformation. The method employs a multi-stage series of rigid 3D-2D registrations performed on sets of automatically determined and increasingly localized sub-images, with the final stage achieving a rigid mapping for each label to yield a locally rigid yet globally deformable solution. The method was evaluated first in a phantom study in which a CT image of the spine was acquired followed by a series of 7 mobile radiographs with increasing degree of deformation applied. Second, the method was validated using a clinical data set of patients exhibiting strong spinal deformation during thoracolumbar spine surgery. Registration accuracy was assessed using projection distance error (PDE) and failure rate (PDE > 20 mm – i.e., label registered outside vertebra). Results The msLevelCheck method was able to register all vertebrae accurately for all cases of deformation in the phantom study, improving the maximum PDE of the rigid method from 22.4 mm to 3.9 mm. The clinical study demonstrated the feasibility of the approach in real patient data by accurately registering all vertebral labels in each case, eliminating all instances of failure encountered in the conventional rigid method. Conclusion The multi-stage approach demonstrated accurate mapping of vertebral labels in the presence of strong spinal deformation. The msLevelCheck method maintains other advantageous aspects of the original LevelCheck method (e.g., compatibility with standard clinical workflow, large capture range, and robustness against mismatch in image content) and extends capability to cases exhibiting strong changes in spinal curvature.