| Literature DB >> 32333360 |
João Cartucho1, David Shapira2,3, Hutan Ashrafian2, Stamatia Giannarou2.
Abstract
PURPOSE: In the last decade, there has been a great effort to bring mixed reality (MR) into the operating room to assist surgeons intraoperatively. However, progress towards this goal is still at an early stage. The aim of this paper is to propose a MR visualisation platform which projects multiple imaging modalities to assist intraoperative surgical guidance.Entities:
Keywords: Augmented reality; Computer-assisted surgery; Head-mounted display; HoloLens; Image-guided surgery; Mixed reality
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32333360 PMCID: PMC7261260 DOI: 10.1007/s11548-020-02165-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg ISSN: 1861-6410 Impact factor: 2.924
Fig. 1Prototype of the scene with the three MR components. These components include a 3D organ model (a), a volumetric imaging data component (b), and a component to visualise intraoperative data (c). Here, the volumetric data show the MRI data of a brain glioblastoma [14], and the 3D model was adopted from [15]
Fig. 2Questionnaire to assess the a MR components, b functionalities, and c overall assessment of our visual platform
Questionnaire scores given by the surgeons
| Question | Individual scores (per surgeon) | Av. | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | score | |
| 1. 3D organ model | 3 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 5 | |
| 2. Preop. MRI | 5 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 3.8 |
| 3. Intraop. pCLE/iUS | 5 | 4 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 3.7 |
| 4. 3D structures selection | 3 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 5 | |
| 5. Scrolling MRI data | 5 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3.4 |
| 6. Select MRI slice | 5 | 4 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 3.3 |
| 7. Drag & Drop | 5 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 3 | |
| 8. Resize & rotate | 5 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3.9 |
| 9. Transparency adjust. | 5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3.8 |
| 10. Intuitive | 5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 3 | |
| 11. Manipulation | 5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | |
| 12. Would use the platf. | 5 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 5 | |
| 13. Would distract me | 5 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3.3 |
| 15. Overall satisfaction | 4 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3.3 |
| Av. score | 2.8 | 2.6 | 3.4 | |||||||
The highest scores are highlighted in bold. Note that this table does not include the answers to question 14
Fig. 3Specialties suitable for the proposed MR visualisation platform. According to the answers to question 14, eight out of the nine surgeons (89%) agree that this visual platform would be very useful in neurosurgery