Nicolas Bourdel1,2, Toby Collins3, Daniel Pizarro3, Adrien Bartoli3, David Da Ines3,4, Bruno Perreira5, Michel Canis6,3. 1. Department of Gynecological Surgery, CHU Clermont Ferrand, 1 Place Lucie Aubrac, 63000, Clermont-Ferrand, France. nicolas.bourdel@gmail.com. 2. Faculté de Médecine, ALCoV-ISIT (UMR6284 CNRS / Université d'Auvergne), 28 Place Henri Dunant, 63000, Clermont-Ferrand, France. nicolas.bourdel@gmail.com. 3. Faculté de Médecine, ALCoV-ISIT (UMR6284 CNRS / Université d'Auvergne), 28 Place Henri Dunant, 63000, Clermont-Ferrand, France. 4. Department of Radiology, CHU Clermont Ferrand, 1 Place Lucie Aubrac, Clermont-Ferrand, France. 5. Biostatistics Unit, Department of Clinical Research and Innovation, CHU Clermont Ferrand, 63000, Clermont-Ferrand, France. 6. Department of Gynecological Surgery, CHU Clermont Ferrand, 1 Place Lucie Aubrac, 63000, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Augmented Reality (AR) is a technology that can allow a surgeon to see subsurface structures. This works by overlaying information from another modality, such as MRI and fusing it in real time with the endoscopic images. AR has never been developed for a very mobile organ like the uterus and has never been performed for gynecology. Myomas are not always easy to localize in laparoscopic surgery when they do not significantly change the surface of the uterus, or are at multiple locations. OBJECTIVE: To study the accuracy of myoma localization using a new AR system compared to MRI-only localization. METHODS: Ten residents were asked to localize six myomas (on a uterine model into a laparoscopic box) when either using AR or in conditions that simulate a standard method (only the MRI was available). Myomas were randomly divided in two groups: the control group (MRI only, AR not activated) and the AR group (AR activated). Software was used to automatically measure the distance between the point of contact on the uterine surface and the myoma. We compared these distances to the true shortest distance to obtain accuracy measures. The time taken to perform the task was measured, and an assessment of the complexity was performed. RESULTS: The mean accuracy in the control group was 16.80 mm [0.1-52.2] versus 0.64 mm [0.01-4.71] with AR. In the control group, the mean time to perform the task was 18.68 [6.4-47.1] s compared to 19.6 [3.9-77.5] s with AR. The mean score of difficulty (evaluated for each myoma) was 2.36 [1-4] versus 0.87 [0-4], respectively, for the control and the AR group. DISCUSSION: We developed an AR system for a very mobile organ. This is the first user study to quantitatively evaluate an AR system for improving a surgical task. In our model, AR improves localization accuracy.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Augmented Reality (AR) is a technology that can allow a surgeon to see subsurface structures. This works by overlaying information from another modality, such as MRI and fusing it in real time with the endoscopic images. AR has never been developed for a very mobile organ like the uterus and has never been performed for gynecology. Myomas are not always easy to localize in laparoscopic surgery when they do not significantly change the surface of the uterus, or are at multiple locations. OBJECTIVE: To study the accuracy of myoma localization using a new AR system compared to MRI-only localization. METHODS: Ten residents were asked to localize six myomas (on a uterine model into a laparoscopic box) when either using AR or in conditions that simulate a standard method (only the MRI was available). Myomas were randomly divided in two groups: the control group (MRI only, AR not activated) and the AR group (AR activated). Software was used to automatically measure the distance between the point of contact on the uterine surface and the myoma. We compared these distances to the true shortest distance to obtain accuracy measures. The time taken to perform the task was measured, and an assessment of the complexity was performed. RESULTS: The mean accuracy in the control group was 16.80 mm [0.1-52.2] versus 0.64 mm [0.01-4.71] with AR. In the control group, the mean time to perform the task was 18.68 [6.4-47.1] s compared to 19.6 [3.9-77.5] s with AR. The mean score of difficulty (evaluated for each myoma) was 2.36 [1-4] versus 0.87 [0-4], respectively, for the control and the AR group. DISCUSSION: We developed an AR system for a very mobile organ. This is the first user study to quantitatively evaluate an AR system for improving a surgical task. In our model, AR improves localization accuracy.
Authors: Cherif Akladios; Victor Gabriele; Vincent Agnus; Camille Martel-Billard; Ralph Saadeh; Olivier Garbin; Lise Lecointre; Jacques Marescaux Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2019-06-03 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Andrew A Gumbs; Vincent Grasso; Nicolas Bourdel; Roland Croner; Gaya Spolverato; Isabella Frigerio; Alfredo Illanes; Mohammad Abu Hilal; Adrian Park; Eyad Elyan Journal: Sensors (Basel) Date: 2022-06-29 Impact factor: 3.847