| Literature DB >> 33859995 |
Fabio Cofano1,2, Giuseppe Di Perna1, Marco Bozzaro2, Alessandro Longo3, Nicola Marengo1, Francesco Zenga1, Nicola Zullo4, Matteo Cavalieri5, Luca Damiani5,6, Daniya J Boges5,7, Marco Agus8, Diego Garbossa1, Corrado Calì9,10.
Abstract
Background: While performing surgeries in the OR, surgeons and assistants often need to access several information regarding surgical planning and/or procedures related to the surgery itself, or the accessory equipment to perform certain operations. The accessibility of this information often relies on the physical presence of technical and medical specialists in the OR, which is increasingly difficult due to the number of limitations imposed by the COVID emergency to avoid overcrowded environments or external personnel. Here, we analyze several scenarios where we equipped OR personnel with augmented reality (AR) glasses, allowing a remote specialist to guide OR operations through voice and ad-hoc visuals, superimposed to the field of view of the operator wearing them.Entities:
Keywords: AR surgery; COVID emergency; augmented reality; hologram 3D display; remote assistance; remote proctor; spine surgery; telementoring and surgery
Year: 2021 PMID: 33859995 PMCID: PMC8042331 DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2021.657901
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Surg ISSN: 2296-875X
Figure 1Graphical representation of AR information flow between OR and remote users. Top panel: key personnel in the OR (i.e., physician, technical specialists, surgeons) wearing AR goggles equipped with software for digital content superimposition (Unity custom tool) and/or video streaming and interaction (e.g., Teamviewer Pilot) from the OR. Goggles models from the left: Microsoft Hololens, Vuzix Blade, Epson BT-350, Epson BT-300. Bottom panel: personnel outside the OR can visualize the video streaming from goggles equipped with Teamviewer Pilot via TeamViewer app on laptops, tablets or smartphones.
System usability scale (SUS).
| I think I would like to use the Augmented Reality (AR) system frequently | |
| I found the AR application unnecessarily complex | |
| I think that I would need technical support for using AR goggles | |
| I like using the AR interface | |
| I think that most people would learn to use this system quickly | |
| I felt very confident using the AR system | |
| I needed to train a lot before I could use the AR system | |
| The information provided by the interfact was clear and helpful | |
| I felt is difficult to interact and control the system |
Figure 2Visualization of intra-operative 3D-model planning (A–D). Surgical planning of screws positioning for lumbar spine fusion is shown (A), with 3D reconstructed model highlighting the screws' entry points (B). Surgeon wore smart glass during surgery (C,D) and, with augmented reality, was able to see the 3D model wherever He preferred into the space (E). The enhanced videoconference function with smart glasses' screen sharing allowed participants to see through the eyes of the surgeon and communicate with him (F).
Figure 3Remote operative Room setup with Epson smart glasses (A–G). Remote vision of the operative room showing neuromonitoring electrodes positioning (A,B,D) and enhanced videoconference function that allowed to avoid the physical presence of specialists consultants in the OR (A–D). Remote vision of patient positioning and instrumentation setting in the OR using enhanced videoconference function (E–G).
Figure 4Violin plots of quantification of the SUS questionnaire (Table 1) on a Likert scale (1 corresponding to “strongly disagree,” and 5 to “strongly agree”). Black dashed line represents the median, the gray dashed lines represents the quartiles, and width of the violin corresponds to the number of points at a certain height. The top graph are the scores from individual questions. Bottom graph is an average from “positive” (green) or “negative” (red) questions. ***p < 0.01, unpaired t-test.