nach oben

International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery

Erschienen in:

30.07.2020 | Original Article

Smartphone- versus smartglasses-based augmented reality (AR) for percutaneous needle interventions: system accuracy and feasibility study

verfasst von: Ming Li, Reza Seifabadi, Dilara Long, Quirina De Ruiter, Nicole Varble, Rachel Hecht, Ayele H. Negussie, Venkatesh Krishnasamy, Sheng Xu, Bradford J. Wood

Erschienen in: International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery | Ausgabe 11/2020

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the system accuracy and needle placement performance of smartphone- and smartglasses-based augmented reality (AR) for percutaneous needle interventions.

Methods

An AR platform was developed to enable the superimposition of annotated anatomy and a planned needle trajectory onto a patient in real time. The system accuracy of the AR display on smartphone (iPhone7) and smartglasses (HoloLens1) devices was evaluated on a 3D-printed phantom. The target overlay error was measured as the distance between actual and virtual targets (n = 336) on the AR display, derived from preprocedural CT. The needle overlay angle was measured as the angular difference between actual and virtual needles (n = 12) on the AR display. Three operators each used the iPhone (n = 8), HoloLens (n = 8) and CT-guided freehand (n = 8) to guide needles into targets in a phantom. Needle placement error was measured with post-placement CT. Needle placement time was recorded from needle puncture to navigation completion.

Results

The target overlay error of the iPhone was comparable to the HoloLens (1.75 ± 0.59 mm, 1.74 ± 0.86 mm, respectively, p = 0.9). The needle overlay angle of the iPhone and HoloLens was similar (0.28 ± 0.32°, 0.41 ± 0.23°, respectively, p = 0.26). The iPhone-guided needle placements showed reduced error compared to the HoloLens (2.58 ± 1.04 mm, 3.61 ± 2.25 mm, respectively, p = 0.05) and increased time (87 ± 17 s, 71 ± 27 s, respectively, p = 0.02). Both AR devices reduced placement error compared to CT-guided freehand (15.92 ± 8.06 mm, both p < 0.001).

Conclusion

An augmented reality platform employed on smartphone and smartglasses devices may provide accurate display and navigation guidance for percutaneous needle-based interventions.

Appelbaum L, Sosna J, Nissenbaum Y, Benshtein A, Goldberg SN (2011) Electromagnetic navigation system for CT-guided biopsy of small lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 196(5):1194–1200. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.10.5151CrossRefPubMed

Krücker J, Xu S, Glossop N, Viswanathan A, Borgert J, Schulz HJWB (2007) Electromagnetic tracking for thermal ablation and biopsy guidance: clinical evaluation of spatial accuracy. J Vasc Interv Radiol 18(9):1141–1150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2007.06.014CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Kloeppel R, Weisse T, Deckert F, Wilke W, Pecher S (2000) CT-guided intervention using a patient laser marker system. Eur Radiol 10(6):1010–1014. https://doi.org/10.1007/s003300051054CrossRefPubMed

Kettenbach J, Kronreif G (2015) Robotic systems for percutaneous needle-guided interventions. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 24(1):45–53. https://doi.org/10.3109/13645706.2014.977299CrossRefPubMed

Deng W, Li F, Wang M, Song Z (2014) Easy-to-use augmented reality neuronavigation using a wireless tablet PC. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg 1:17–24. https://doi.org/10.1159/000354816CrossRef

Watanabe E, Satoh M, Konno T, Hirai MTY (2016) The trans-visible navigator: a see-through neuronavigation system using augmented reality. World Neurosurg 87:399–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2015.11.084CrossRefPubMed

Pratt P, Ives M, Lawton G, Simmons J, Radev N, Spyropoulou L, Amiras D (2018) Through the HoloLens™ looking glass: augmented reality for extremity reconstruction surgery using 3D vascular models with perforating vessels. Eur Radiol Exp. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41747-017-0033-2CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Solbiati M, Passera KM, Rotilio A, Oliva F, Marre I, Goldberg SN, Ierace T, Solbiati L (2018) Augmented reality for interventional oncology: proof-of-concept study of a novel high-end guidance system platform. Eur Radiol Exp 2:18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41747-018-0054-5CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Hecht R, Li M, de Ruiter QMB, Pritchard WF, Li X, Krishnasamy V, Saad W, Karanian JW, Wood BJ (2020) Smartphone augmented reality CT-based platform for needle insertion guidance: a phantom study. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-019-02403-6CrossRefPubMed

10.

Park BJ, Hunt SJ, Martin C, Nadolski GJ, Wood BJ, Gade TP (2020) Augmented and mixed reality: technologies for enhancing the future of IR. J Vasc Interv Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2019.09.020CrossRefPubMed

11.

Kuzhagaliyev T, Clancy NT, Janatka M, Tchaka K, Vasconcelos F, Clarkson MJ, Gurusamy K, Hawkes DJ, Davidson B, Stoyanov D (2018) Augmented reality needle ablation guidance tool for irreversible electroporation in the pancreas. In: SPIE Medical Imaging, Houston, Texas, p 1057613. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2293671

12.

Al-Nimer S, Hanlon A, Cho K, Kalra-Lall A, Weunski C, Yanof J, West K, Martin C 3rd (2020) 3D holographic guidance and navigation for percutaneous ablation of solid tumor. J Vasc Interv Radiol 31(3):526–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2019.09.027CrossRefPubMed

13.

Heinrich F, Joeres F, Lawonn K, Hansen C (2019) Comparison of projective augmented reality concepts to support medical needle insertion. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph. https://doi.org/10.1109/tvcg.2019.2903942CrossRefPubMed

14.

Held RT, Hui TT (2011) A guide to stereoscopic 3D displays in medicine. Acad Radiol 18(8):1035–1048. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2011.04.005CrossRefPubMed

15.

Condino S, Carbone M, Piazza R, Ferrari M, Ferrari V (2020) Perceptual limits of optical see-through visors for augmented reality guidance of manual tasks. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 67(2):411–419. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2019.2914517CrossRefPubMed

16.

Grubert J, Itoh Y, Moser K, Swan JE (2018) A survey of calibration methods for optical see-through head-mounted displays. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph 24(9):2649–2662. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2017.2754257CrossRefPubMed

17.

Fichtinger G, Deguet A, Masamune K, Balogh E, Fischer GS, Mathieu H, Taylor RH, Zinreich SJ, Fayad LM (2005) Image overlay guidance for needle insertion in CT scanner. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 52(8):1415–1424. https://doi.org/10.1109/tbme.2005.851493CrossRefPubMed

18.

Racadio JM, Nachabe R, Homan R, Schierling R, Racadio JM, Babic D (2016) Augmented reality on a C-Arm system: a preclinical assessment for percutaneous needle localization. Radiology 281(1):249–255. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2016151040CrossRefPubMed

19.

Vovk A, Wild F, Guest W, Kuula T (2018) Simulator sickness in augmented reality training using the Microsoft HoloLens. In: CHI Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst., Montreal QC, Canada, ACM, pp 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173783

20.

Hua H, Javidi B (2014) 3D integral imaging optical see-through head-mounted display. Opt Express 22(11):13484–13491. https://doi.org/10.1364/OE.22.013484CrossRefPubMed

21.

Lanman D, Luebke D (2013) Near-eye light field displays. ACM Trans Graph. https://doi.org/10.1145/2508363.2508366CrossRef

22.

Singh G, Ellis SR, Swan JE II (2018) The effect of focal distance, age, and brightness on near-field augmented reality depth matching. J IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2018.2869729CrossRef

23.

Rosenthal M, State A, Lee J, Hirota G, Ackerman J, Keller K, Pisano E, Jiroutek M, Muller K, Fuchs H (2002) Augmented reality guidance for needle biopsies: an initial randomized, controlled trial in phantoms. Med Image Anal 6(3):313–320CrossRefPubMed

24.

Wacker FK, Vogt S, Khamene A, Jesberger JA, Nour SG, Elgort DR, Sauer F, Duerk JL, Lewin JS (2006) An augmented reality system for MR image-guided needle biopsy: initial results in a swine model. Radiology 238(2):497–504. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2382041441CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Smartphone- versus smartglasses-based augmented reality (AR) for percutaneous needle interventions: system accuracy and feasibility study
verfasst von: Ming Li
Reza Seifabadi
Dilara Long
Quirina De Ruiter
Nicole Varble
Rachel Hecht
Ayele H. Negussie
Venkatesh Krishnasamy
Sheng Xu
Bradford J. Wood
Publikationsdatum: 30.07.2020
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in: International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery / Ausgabe 11/2020
Print ISSN: 1861-6410
Elektronische ISSN: 1861-6429
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-020-02235-7

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

18.04.2024 | Pädiatrische Notfallmedizin | Nachrichten

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Smartphone- versus smartglasses-based augmented reality (AR) for percutaneous needle interventions: system accuracy and feasibility study

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

Fünf Dinge, die im Kindernotfall besser zu unterlassen sind

Wie toxische Männlichkeit der Gesundheit von Männern schadet

Studie bestätigt Potenzial von KI in der Radiologie

Quantitative Angiografie könnte IVUS-Alternative darstellen

Update Radiologie

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 11/2020

Artificial intelligence in detection and segmentation of internal auditory canal and its nerves using deep learning techniques

An automatic approach to establish clinically desired final dental occlusion for one-piece maxillary orthognathic surgery

Fast and accurate online calibration of optical see-through head-mounted display for AR-based surgical navigation using Microsoft HoloLens

Clearness of operating field: a surrogate for surgical skills on in vivo clinical data

Automatic segmentation of the carotid artery and internal jugular vein from 2D ultrasound images for 3D vascular reconstruction

A simple tool to automate the insertion process in cochlear implant surgery

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

Fünf Dinge, die im Kindernotfall besser zu unterlassen sind

Wie toxische Männlichkeit der Gesundheit von Männern schadet

Studie bestätigt Potenzial von KI in der Radiologie

Quantitative Angiografie könnte IVUS-Alternative darstellen

Update Radiologie