Real-time augmented reality application in presurgical planning and lesion scalp localization by a smartphone

Shu, Xu-jun; Wang, Yu; Xin, Hao; Zhang, Zhizhong; Xue, Zhe; Wang, Fuyu; Xu, Bainan

doi:10.1007/s00701-021-04968-z

Cited by 8 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The substantial, expensive hardware systems and complex workflows challenge the widespread adoption of microscope-based navigation. Hence, there has been increasing interest in smaller, low-cost, and easy-to-use alternatives for AR-guided interventions, such as projector-based [18,19], smartphone-based [20][21][22][23][24], tablet-based [22,[25][26][27], and head-mounted display (HMD)-based AR [7,8,10,28]. These AR paradigms are widely used as "low-cost navigation" in underdeveloped regions or healthcare facilities with limited resources.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Once the user deviates from the projector's projecting direction, the parallax between the virtual model and the actual anatomical structure confuses the AR experience, making projector AR more suitable for the preoperative localization of superficial cranial lesions [18,19,29]. Smartphones and tablets have sufficient computational resources for 3D rendering, model smoothing, and ambient light simulation, enhancing users' sense of depth and realism when perceiving virtual objects [20,21,25,26]. Nonetheless, given the limited screen size, they provide a restricted field of view.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Novel Registration Method for a Mixed Reality Navigation System Based on a Laser Crosshair Simulator: A Technical Note

Qi,

Bopp,

Nimsky

et al. 2023

Bioengineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mixed Reality Navigation (MRN) is pivotal in augmented reality-assisted intelligent neurosurgical interventions. However, existing MRN registration methods face challenges in concurrently achieving low user dependency, high accuracy, and clinical applicability. This study proposes and evaluates a novel registration method based on a laser crosshair simulator, evaluating its feasibility and accuracy. A novel registration method employing a laser crosshair simulator was introduced, designed to replicate the scanner frame’s position on the patient. The system autonomously calculates the transformation, mapping coordinates from the tracking space to the reference image space. A mathematical model and workflow for registration were designed, and a Universal Windows Platform (UWP) application was developed on HoloLens-2. Finally, a head phantom was used to measure the system’s target registration error (TRE). The proposed method was successfully implemented, obviating the need for user interactions with virtual objects during the registration process. Regarding accuracy, the average deviation was 3.7 ± 1.7 mm. This method shows encouraging results in efficiency and intuitiveness and marks a valuable advancement in low-cost, easy-to-use MRN systems. The potential for enhancing accuracy and adaptability in intervention procedures positions this approach as promising for improving surgical outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Novel Registration Method for a Mixed Reality Navigation System Based on a Laser Crosshair Simulator: A Technical Note

Qi,

Bopp,

Nimsky

et al. 2023

Bioengineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In 30 studies (38%), the use of a head-mounted device for neurosurgery was evaluated ( Supplemental Digital Content 2, Table 1 , http://links.lww.com/ONS/B48). 10-86 In most of these studies, the HoloLens (Microsoft) was used for AR visualization. In 26 studies (32%), an image overlay, for either the microscopic or endoscopic field of view, was used.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most of the studies reported on multiple evaluation metrics ( Supplemental Digital Content 3, Table 2 , http://links.lww.com/ONS/B49). 10-83,85-90 Based on the results of this review, the following evaluation categories have been defined: (1) registration accuracy, (2) clinical outcome, (3) time measurements, (4) task performance, (5) technical reliability, and (6) user perception (Table).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluation Metrics for Augmented Reality in Neurosurgical Preoperative Planning, Surgical Navigation, and Surgical Treatment Guidance: A Systematic Review

Kos,

Colombo,

Bartels

et al. 2023

Operative Neurosurgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Recent years have shown an advancement in the development of augmented reality (AR) technologies for preoperative visualization, surgical navigation, and intraoperative guidance for neurosurgery. However, proving added value for AR in clinical practice is challenging, partly because of a lack of standardized evaluation metrics. We performed a systematic review to provide an overview of the reported evaluation metrics for AR technologies in neurosurgical practice and to establish a foundation for assessment and comparison of such technologies. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane were searched systematically for publications on assessment of AR for cranial neurosurgery on September 22, 2022. The findings were reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. RESULTS: The systematic search yielded 830 publications; 114 were screened full text, and 80 were included for analysis. Among the included studies, 5% dealt with preoperative visualization using AR, with user perception as the most frequently reported metric. The majority (75%) researched AR technology for surgical navigation, with registration accuracy, clinical outcome, and time measurements as the most frequently reported metrics. In addition, 20% studied the use of AR for intraoperative guidance, with registration accuracy, task outcome, and user perception as the most frequently reported metrics. CONCLUSION: For quality benchmarking of AR technologies in neurosurgery, evaluation metrics should be specific to the risk profile and clinical objectives of the technology. A key focus should be on using validated questionnaires to assess user perception; ensuring clear and unambiguous reporting of registration accuracy, precision, robustness, and system stability; and accurately measuring task performance in clinical studies. We provided an overview suggesting which evaluation metrics to use per AR application and innovation phase, aiming to improve the assessment of added value of AR for neurosurgical practice and to facilitate the integration in the clinical workflow.

show abstract

More than meets the eye: Augmented reality in surgical oncology

Prasad,

Fassler,

Miller

et al. 2024

Journal of Surgical Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and ObjectivesIn the field of surgical oncology, there has been a desire for innovative techniques to improve tumor visualization, resection, and patient outcomes. Augmented reality (AR) technology superimposes digital content onto the real‐world environment, enhancing the user's experience by blending digital and physical elements. A thorough examination of AR technology in surgical oncology has yet to be performed.MethodsA scoping review of intraoperative AR in surgical oncology was conducted according to the guidelines and recommendations of The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta‐analyzes Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA‐ScR) framework. All original articles examining the use of intraoperative AR during surgical management of cancer were included. Exclusion criteria included virtual reality applications only, preoperative use only, fluorescence, AR not specific to surgical oncology, and study design (reviews, commentaries, abstracts).ResultsA total of 2735 articles were identified of which 83 were included. Most studies (52) were performed on animals or phantom models, while the remaining included patients. A total of 1112 intraoperative AR surgical cases were performed across the studies. The most common anatomic site was brain (20 articles), followed by liver (16), renal (9), and head and neck (8). AR was most often used for intraoperative navigation or anatomic visualization of tumors or critical structures but was also used to identify osteotomy or craniotomy planes.ConclusionsAR technology has been applied across the field of surgical oncology to aid in localization and resection of tumors.

show abstract

Real-time augmented reality application in presurgical planning and lesion scalp localization by a smartphone

Cited by 8 publications

References 20 publications

A Novel Registration Method for a Mixed Reality Navigation System Based on a Laser Crosshair Simulator: A Technical Note

A Novel Registration Method for a Mixed Reality Navigation System Based on a Laser Crosshair Simulator: A Technical Note

Evaluation Metrics for Augmented Reality in Neurosurgical Preoperative Planning, Surgical Navigation, and Surgical Treatment Guidance: A Systematic Review

More than meets the eye: Augmented reality in surgical oncology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About