Literature DB >> 12588036

Implementation, calibration and accuracy testing of an image-enhanced endoscopy system.

Ramin Shahidi1, Michael R Bax, Calvin R Maurer, Jeremy A Johnson, Eric P Wilkinson, Bai Wang, Jay B West, Martin J Citardi, Kim H Manwaring, Rasool Khadem.   

Abstract

This paper presents a new method for image-guided surgery called image-enhanced endoscopy. Registered real and virtual endoscopic images (perspective volume renderings generated from the same view as the endoscope camera using a preoperative image) are displayed simultaneously; when combined with the ability to vary tissue transparency in the virtual images, this provides surgeons with the ability to see beyond visible surfaces and, thus, provides additional exposure during surgery. A mount with four photoreflective spheres is rigidly attached to the endoscope and its position and orientation is tracked using an optical position sensor. Generation of virtual images that are accurately registered to the real endoscopic images requires calibration of the tracked endoscope. The calibration process determines intrinsic parameters (that represent the projection of three-dimensional points onto the two-dimensional endoscope camera imaging plane) and extrinsic parameters (that represent the transformation from the coordinate system of the tracker mount attached to the endoscope to the coordinate system of the endoscope camera), and determines radial lens distortion. The calibration routine is fast, automatic, accurate and reliable, and is insensitive to rotational orientation of the endoscope. The routine automatically detects, localizes, and identifies dots in a video image snapshot of the calibration target grid and determines the calibration parameters from the sets of known physical coordinates and localized image coordinates of the target grid dots. Using nonlinear lens-distortion correction, which can be performed at real-time rates (30 frames per second), the mean projection error is less than 0.5 mm at distances up to 25 mm from the endoscope tip, and less than 1.0 mm up to 45 mm. Experimental measurements and point-based registration error theory show that the tracking error is about 0.5-0.7 mm at the tip of the endoscope and less than 0.9 mm for all points in the field of view of the endoscope camera at a distance of up to 65 mm from the tip. It is probable that much of the projection error is due to endoscope tracking error rather than calibration error. Two examples of clinical applications are presented to illustrate the usefulness of image-enhanced endoscopy. This method is a useful addition to conventional image-guidance systems, which generally show only the position of the tip (and sometimes the orientation) of a surgical instrument or probe on reformatted image slices.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Non-programmatic

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12588036     DOI: 10.1109/tmi.2002.806597

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging        ISSN: 0278-0062            Impact factor:   10.048


  26 in total

1.  Quantitative evaluation for accumulative calibration error and video-CT registration errors in electromagnetic-tracked endoscopy.

Authors:  Sheena Xin Liu; Luis F Gutiérrez; Doug Stanton
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2010-08-17       Impact factor: 2.924

2.  Low-distortion perturbative solutions in a camera calibration model including high-distortion radial effects.

Authors:  Matteo Ciucci; Daniel Stein; Joerg Raczkowsky; Heinz Wörn
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2010-05-23       Impact factor: 2.924

3.  Overlay visualization in endoscopic ENT surgery.

Authors:  Christian Winne; Martin Khan; Fabian Stopp; Emanuel Jank; Erwin Keeve
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2010-06-26       Impact factor: 2.924

4.  [Workflow analysis to assess the efficiency of intraoperative technology using the example of functional endoscopic sinus surgery].

Authors:  G Strauss; M Fischer; J Meixensberger; V Falk; C Trantakis; D Winkler; F Bootz; O Burgert; A Dietz; H U Lemke
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 1.284

5.  Real-time marker-free patient registration for electromagnetic navigated bronchoscopy: a phantom study.

Authors:  Daisuke Deguchi; Marco Feuerstein; Takayuki Kitasaka; Yasuhito Suenaga; Ichiro Ide; Hiroshi Murase; Kazuyoshi Imaizumi; Yoshinori Hasegawa; Kensaku Mori
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2011-06-07       Impact factor: 2.924

6.  Live augmented reality: a new visualization method for laparoscopic surgery using continuous volumetric computed tomography.

Authors:  Raj Shekhar; Omkar Dandekar; Venkatesh Bhat; Mathew Philip; Peng Lei; Carlos Godinez; Erica Sutton; Ivan George; Steven Kavic; Reuben Mezrich; Adrian Park
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-02-21       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 7.  Navigated laparoscopic ultrasound in abdominal soft tissue surgery: technological overview and perspectives.

Authors:  Thomas Langø; Sinara Vijayan; Anna Rethy; Cecilie Våpenstad; Ole Vegard Solberg; Ronald Mårvik; Gjermund Johnsen; Toril N Hernes
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2011-09-03       Impact factor: 2.924

8.  Feasibility and accuracy of a voxel-based neuronavigation system with 3D image rendering in preoperative planning and as a learning tool for young neurosurgeons, exemplified by the anatomical localization of the superior sagittal sinus.

Authors:  Guenther C Feigl; Firas Thaher; Sören Danz; Marcos Tatagiba; Anne K Hickmann; Antje Fahrig; Tomaz Velnar; Marcel Kullmann
Journal:  Bosn J Basic Med Sci       Date:  2019-05-20       Impact factor: 3.363

9.  Combining intraoperative ultrasound brain shift correction and augmented reality visualizations: a pilot study of eight cases.

Authors:  Ian J Gerard; Marta Kersten-Oertel; Simon Drouin; Jeffery A Hall; Kevin Petrecca; Dante De Nigris; Daniel A Di Giovanni; Tal Arbel; D Louis Collins
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2018-01-26

10.  Virtual reality augmentation in skull base surgery.

Authors:  Steffen K Rosahl; Alireza Gharabaghi; Ulrich Hubbe; Ramin Shahidi; Madjid Samii
Journal:  Skull Base       Date:  2006-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.