| Literature DB >> 35054164 |
Tadatsugu Morimoto1, Takaomi Kobayashi1, Hirohito Hirata1, Koji Otani2, Maki Sugimoto3, Masatsugu Tsukamoto1, Tomohito Yoshihara1, Masaya Ueno1, Masaaki Mawatari1.
Abstract
In recent years, with the rapid advancement and consumerization of virtual reality, augmented reality, mixed reality, and extended reality (XR) technology, the use of XR technology in spine medicine has also become increasingly popular. The rising use of XR technology in spine medicine has also been accelerated by the recent wave of digital transformation (i.e., case-specific three-dimensional medical images and holograms, wearable sensors, video cameras, fifth generation, artificial intelligence, and head-mounted displays), and further accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic and the increase in minimally invasive spine surgery. The COVID-19 pandemic has a negative impact on society, but positive impacts can also be expected, including the continued spread and adoption of telemedicine services (i.e., tele-education, tele-surgery, tele-rehabilitation) that promote digital transformation. The purpose of this narrative review is to describe the accelerators of XR (VR, AR, MR) technology in spine medicine and then to provide a comprehensive review of the use of XR technology in spine medicine, including surgery, consultation, education, and rehabilitation, as well as to identify its limitations and future perspectives (status quo and quo vadis).Entities:
Keywords: augmented reality; extended reality; mixed reality; navigation; spine surgery; telemedicine; virtual reality
Year: 2022 PMID: 35054164 PMCID: PMC8779726 DOI: 10.3390/jcm11020470
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Clin Med ISSN: 2077-0383 Impact factor: 4.241
Figure 1XR technology in spine medicine in contents of this manuscript. XR, extended reality; AI, artificial intelligence; ML, machine learning; DL, deep learning; HMD, head mounted display.
Figure 2Three-dimensional medical images and holograms for preoperative simulation (A) and intraoperative surgical assistant (B). The green line was used as a guideline for the insertion of pedicle screws.
A summary of surgical simulation with XR technology in spine surgery.
| Study | Country | Procedure | VR/AR | Model | Simulator | Participant | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hou et al., 2018 [ | China | Cervical pedicle screw | VR-simulation | Phantom model, Cadaver model | Virtual Surgery Training System (VSTS) | Residents | Accuracy |
| Hou et al., 2018 [ | China | Thoracic pedicle screw | VR-simulation | Phantom model, Cadaver model | Virtual Surgery Training System (VSTS) | Residents | Accuracy |
| Luciano et al., 2011 [ | USA | Thoracic pedicle screw | AR-guide | Phantom model | ImmersiveTouch (San Francisco, CA, USA) | Residents | Accuracy |
| Xiang et al., 2015 [ | China | Thoracolumbar pedicle screw | VR-simulation | Phantom model | Proprietary cross-platform simulator written in C++ | Residents | Time |
| Xin et al., 2018 [ | China | Thoracolumbar pedicle screw | VR-simulation | Phantom model, Cadaver model | Unspecified VR system, UG NX8.0, Seimens, Munich, Germany | Trainees | Time |
| Chitale et al., 2013 [ | USA | Lumbar pedicle screw | AR-guide | Phantom model | Medtronic Surgical Technologies | Residents | Accuracy, Time |
| Gasco et al., 2014 [ | USA | Lumbar pedicle screw | AR-guide | Cadaver model | ImmersiveTouch (San Francisco, CA, USA | Medical students | Accuracy |
| Gibby et al., 2019 [ | USA | Lumbar pedicle screw | AR-guide | Phantom model | Microsoft HoloLens (Redmond, WA, USA), Novarad OpenSight (American Fork, UT, USA | Medical students, Trainees | Accuracy, Time |
| Liebmann et al., 2019 [ | Switzerland | Lumbar pedicle screw | AR-guide | Phantom model | Microsoft HoloLens (Redmond, WA, USA) | Surgeon | Accuracy |
| Luciano et al., 2011 [ | USA | Lumbar pedicle screw | AR-guide | Phantom model | ImmersiveTouch (San Francisco, CA, USA) | Trainees, Residents | Accuracy |
| Ma et al., 2017 [ | China | Lumbar pedicle screw | AR-guide | Phantom model | Unspecified developed surgical navigation system | Surgeon | Accuracy |
| Molina et al., 2019 [ | USA | Lumbar pedicle screw | AR-guide | Cadaver model | Unspecified developed surgical navigation system (AR) | 2 Surgeons | Accuracy, Questionnaire |
| Molina et al., 2020 [ | USA | Lumbar pedicle screw | AR-guide | Cadaver model | Unspecified developed surgical navigation system (AR) | 2 Surgeons | Accuracy |
| Mostafa et al., 2017 [ | Canada | Lumbar pedicle screw | VR-simulation | Phantom model | NeurosimVR, ImmersiveTouch (San Francisco, CA, USA) | Surgeons | Questionnaire |
| Rambani et al., 2014 [ | UK | Lumbar pedicle screw | VR-simulation | Phantom model | Unspecified developed computer-assisted orthopedic training system | Trainees | Accuracy, Time, Radiation exposure |
| Gottschalk et al., 2015 [ | USA | Cervical lateral mass screw | AR-guide | Cadaver model, Sawbone model | Stealth 3D Navigation Unit, Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA | Residents | Accuracy |
| Fritz et al., 2013 [ | USA | Lumbar vertebral body puncture | AR-guide | Cadaver model | Unspecified developed magnetic resonance (MR)-guided osseous biopsy | Radiologist | Accuracy, Time |
| U-Thainual et al., 2013 [ | Canada | Lumbar vertebral body puncture | AR-guide | Phantom model | Unspecified developed MRI-guided musculoskeletal interventions Magnetic Resonance Image Overlay System (MR-IOS). | Operators | Accuracy, Time |
| Färber et al., 2009 [ | Germany | Lumbar vertebral body puncture | VR-simulation | Phantom model | Sensable Phantom Premium 1.5 | Medical students | Accuracy |
| Deib et al., 2018 [ | USA | Vertebroplasty (Kyphoplasty) | AR-guide | Phantom model | Unspecified developed system | Operators | Accuracy, Time |
| Koch et al., 2019 [ | Germany | Vertebroplasty (Kyphoplasty) | VR-simulation | Phantom model | VR vertebroplasty simulator | Operators | Questionnaire |
| Weigl et al., 2016 [ | Germany | Vertebroplasty (Kyphoplasty) | VR-simulation | Phantom model | Novint Falcon (Novint Technologis, Inc., Albuquerque, NM, USA) | Surgeons | Radiation exposure, Workload (SURG-TLX scores (mental workload)) |
| Wucherer et al., 2014 [ | Germany | Vertebroplasty (Kyphoplasty) | VR-simulation | Phantom model | Novint Falcon (Novint Technologis, Inc., Albuquerque, NM, USA) | Surgeons | None |
| Wucherer et al., 2015 [ | Germany | Vertebroplasty (Kyphoplasty) | VR-simulation | Phantom model | Novint Falcon (Novint Technologis, Inc., Albuquerque, NM, USA) | Surgeons | Radiation exposure, Workload (SURG-TLX scores (mental workload)) |
| Dennler et al., 2021 [ | Switzerland | Percutaneous sacroiliac screw insertion | AR-guide | Sawbone model | Unspecified developed system | Surgeons | Accuracy |
| Jeong et al., 2019 [ | Korea | Percutaneous sacroiliac screw insertion | VR-simulation | Phantom model, Cadaver model | Unspecified developed system | Surgeons | Accuracy |
| Wang et al., 2016 [ | China | Percutaneous sacroiliac screw insertion | AR-guide | Cadaver model | Unspecified developed system | Surgeons | Accuracy |
| Deib et al., 2018 [ | USA | Lumbar percutaneous lumbar discectomy | AR-guide | Phantom model | Unspecified developed system | Operators | Accuracy, Time |
| Bisson et al., 2010 [ | Canada | Lumbar percutaneous lumbar discectomy | VR-simulation | Phantom model | Unspecified developed system | Operators | Accuracy |
| Hu et al., 2017 [ | China | Lumbar percutaneous lumbar discectomy | VR-simulation | Phantom model | Unspecified developed system | Operators | Time |
| Zhou et al., 2019 [ | China | Lumbar percutaneous lumbar discectomy | VR-simulation | Phantom model | Unspecified developed system | Operators | Time |
| Moult et al., 2013 [ | Canada | Lumbar facet joint injection | VR-simulation | Phantom model | Perk Tutor, SonixTouch US system with SonixGPS | Medical students | Accuracy, Time |
| Moore et al., 2009 [ | Canada | Lumbar facet joint injection | VR-simulation, AR-guide | Phantom model | Unspecified developed system | Anesthetists | Accuracy |
| Yeo et al., 2011 [ | Canada | Lumbar facet joint injection | VR-simulation | Phantom model | Perk Station (The Perk Lab, Queen’s University, Canada) | Medical students | Accuracy, Time |
XR, extended reality; VR, virtual reality; AR, augmented reality.
A summary of surgical navigation with XR technology in spine surgery.
| Study | Country | Procedure | VR/AR | Simulator | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elmi-Terander et al., 2019 [ | Sweden | Lumbar pedicle screw | VR-simulation, AR-guide | Unspecified developed system—the ARSN system | Accuracy, time, clinical outcomes |
| Edström et al., 2019 [ | Sweden | Lumbar pedicle screw | VR-simulation, AR-guide | Unspecified developed system—the ARSN system | Ratiation exposure, clinical outcomes |
| Umebayashi | Japan | Cervical foraminotomy | AR-guide | Medtronic StealthStation S7 | Feasibility of intraoperative use |
| Kosterhon et al., 2017 [ | Germany | Lumbar osteotomy planning | XR—volume rendered spine with VR preoperative planning and AR intraoperative workflow | Amira R, FEI Visualization Sciences Group, version 5.4.2, Mérignac Cedex, France | Feasibility of intraoperative use, clinical outcomes |
| Abe et al., 2013 [ | Japan | Lumbar percutaneous intervention | AR-guide | Unspecified developed system-Virtual Protractor with Augmented Reality (VIPAR) | Accuracy |
| Wei et al., 2019 [ | China | Lumbar percutaneous intervention | AR-guide | Baholo, Shanghai Front Computing Company, China; Medivi, Changzhou, China; Hololens, Microsoft, USA | Time (ope, radiation), clinical outcomes |
| Wu et al., 2014 [ | China | Lumbar percutaneous intervention | AR-guide | Unspecified developed system | Accuracy, time (ope, radiation) |
| Carl et al., 2019 [ | Germany | Extra- and intradural tumor resection (whole spine) | AR-guide | Unspecified developed system | Feasibility of intraoperative use |
| Carl et al., 2019 [ | Germany | Extra- and intradural tumor resection (whole spine) | AR-guide | Unspecified developed system | Accuracy, ratiation exposure |
XR, extended reality; VR, virtual reality; AR, augmented reality.