A Mixed-Reality System for Breast Surgical Planning

Perkins, Stephanie L.; Lin, Michael A.; Srinivasan, Suseela; Wheeler, Amanda; Hargreaves, Brian A.; Daniel, Bruce L.

doi:10.1109/ismar-adjunct.2017.92

Cited by 50 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Regardless of scenario comparison, this table shows that accuracy is inferior mainly when performing the experiment in the Z-axis. Similar results concerning the Z-axis are also observed in previous studies [29,36,37]. To our knowledge, there are no previous works in the literature emphasizing the importance of visual axes on TED in an inside-out, marker-based navigation system and demonstrating consistent variations in registration accuracy.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…In addition, this 2 mm error range was achieved without adding any commercial outside-in optical tracking systems, in comparison with other studies achieving similar results [1,17,28]. While different studies testing the accuracy of ArUco marker-based registration can be found in the literature [24,29], the units of accuracy are not usually given in mm, but rather in pixels and computing time because the camera used in the MR device has a major role in its registration accuracy. There are, however, some ArUco-based MR registration studies using the HoloLens that give accuracy in ranges from 0.47 mm to 2.3 cm [30,31].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 72%

“…Overall, the literature presents error ranges from 0 to 10 mm by using diverse navigation and accuracy measurement methods on different surgical specialties with the Microsoft HoloLens [8,28,29,[32][33][34]. This collective experimental heterogeneity makes it cumbersome to pinpoint the crucial elements that create such data variability.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Value of the surgeon’s sightline on hologram registration and targeting in mixed reality

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Mixed reality (MR) is being evaluated as a visual tool for surgical navigation. Current literature presents unclear results on intraoperative accuracy using the Microsoft HoloLens 1®. This study aims to assess the impact of the surgeon’s sightline in an inside-out marker-based MR navigation system for open surgery. Methods Surgeons at Akershus University Hospital tested this system. A custom-made phantom was used, containing 18 wire target crosses within its inner walls. A CT scan was obtained in order to segment all wire targets into a single 3D-model (hologram). An in-house software application (CTrue), developed for the Microsoft HoloLens 1, uploaded 3D-models and automatically registered the 3D-model with the phantom. Based on the surgeon’s sightline while registering and targeting (free sightline /F/or a strictly perpendicular sightline /P/), 4 scenarios were developed (FF-PF-FP-PP). Target error distance (TED) was obtained in three different working axes-(XYZ). Results Six surgeons (5 males, age 29–62) were enrolled. A total of 864 measurements were collected in 4 scenarios, twice. Scenario PP showed the smallest TED in XYZ-axes mean = 2.98 mm ± SD 1.33; 2.28 mm ± SD 1.45; 2.78 mm ± SD 1.91, respectively. Scenario FF showed the largest TED in XYZ-axes with mean = 10.03 mm ± SD 3.19; 6.36 mm ± SD 3.36; 16.11 mm ± SD 8.91, respectively. Multiple comparison tests, grouped in scenarios and axes, showed that the majority of scenario comparisons had significantly different TED values (p < 0.05). Y-axis always presented the smallest TED regardless of scenario tested. Conclusion A strictly perpendicular working sightline in relation to the 3D-model achieves the best accuracy results. Shortcomings in this technology, as an intraoperative visual cue, can be overcome by sightline correction. Incidentally, this is the preferred working angle for open surgery.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 72%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Value of the surgeon’s sightline on hologram registration and targeting in mixed reality

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another interesting augmented reality application using planar markers is [18], which proposes a system to aid breast surgical planning. The system projects 3D ''holograms'' of images from breast MRI onto the patients using Microsoft HoloLens.…”

Section: Related Work a Squared Planar Marker Trackingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simultaneous Multi-View Camera Pose Estimation and Object Tracking With Squared Planar Markers

Sarmadi¹,

Muñoz-Salinas²,

Berbís³

et al. 2019

IEEE Access

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Object tracking is a key aspect in many applications, such as augmented reality in medicine (e.g., tracking a surgical instrument) or robotics. Squared planar markers have become popular tools for tracking since their pose can be estimated from their four corners. While using a single marker and a single camera limits the working area considerably, using multiple markers attached to an object requires estimating their relative position, which is not trivial, for high-accuracy tracking. Likewise, using multiple cameras requires estimating their extrinsic parameters, also a tedious process that must be repeated whenever a camera is moved. This paper proposes a novel method to simultaneously solve the above-mentioned problems. From a video sequence showing a rigid set of planar markers recorded from multiple cameras, the proposed method is able to automatically obtain the three-dimensional configuration of the markers, the extrinsic parameters of the cameras, and the relative pose between the markers and the cameras at each frame. Our experiments show that our approach can obtain highly accurate results for estimating these parameters using the low-resolution cameras. Once the parameters are obtained, tracking of the object can be done in real time with a low computational cost. The proposed method is a step forward in the development of cost-effective solutions for object tracking. INDEX TERMS Fiducial markers, camera pose estimation, robotics, augmented reality.

show abstract

“…Recent advances in technology have allowed for increased portability of augmented reality hardware, making more widespread utilization possible 8,9 . While preliminary investigation of accuracy and precision of augmented reality models has been described with large, projection based equipment 10 , only limited data exists for accuracy and precision of head mounted display (HMD)-based conversion of Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) medical imaging information into augmented reality models 6,[11][12][13][14][15][16] . This technique holds promise for clinical applications in pre-surgical planning and in medical education 12,16 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Accuracy and Precision of 3D Augmented Reality Holographic models derived from DICOM data

Uribe

Laguna

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Assess accuracy and precision of measurements on 3D Augmented reality (AR) models derived from CT DICOM data, and compare AR model measurements with PACS measurements. Materials/Methods: 5 individual 3D hologram models were produced using a CT phantom with fiducial markers set at varying distances. DICOM files were translated into 3D AR models using open source software. AR models were adapted for display on the Microsoft HoloLens using a novel application. AR models were projected and distances between the projected fiducial markers were measured. Finally, 5 measurements each were obtained of the holographic projected distances between fiducials in the x1, y1, and z1 labeled planes respectively for precision assessment. Mann-Whitney U test was performed to compare measured distances on AGFA-PACS, AR models, and actual measured distances on phantom models. Results: No significant difference was found between gold standard measurements and either PACS measurements (p=0.9124) or AR measurements (p=0.8966). AR model measurements had a standard error of 0.24mm, 0.24mm, and 0.38mm in the x,y, and z planes respectively. Furthermore, measurements on AR models demonstrated a high degree of accuracy in comparison to gold standard measurements. Conclusion: Current AR technology is can produce reliable 3D AR models from CT DICOM data

show abstract

A Mixed-Reality System for Breast Surgical Planning

Cited by 50 publications

References 36 publications

Value of the surgeon’s sightline on hologram registration and targeting in mixed reality

Value of the surgeon’s sightline on hologram registration and targeting in mixed reality

Simultaneous Multi-View Camera Pose Estimation and Object Tracking With Squared Planar Markers

Assessing Accuracy and Precision of 3D Augmented Reality Holographic models derived from DICOM data

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About