Dataset Information

HoloLens 1 vs. HoloLens 2: Improvements in the New Model for Orthopedic Oncological Interventions.

ABSTRACT: This work analyzed the use of Microsoft HoloLens 2 in orthopedic oncological surgeries and compares it to its predecessor (Microsoft HoloLens 1). Specifically, we developed two equivalent applications, one for each device, and evaluated the augmented reality (AR) projection accuracy in an experimental scenario using phantoms based on two patients. We achieved automatic registration between virtual and real worlds using patient-specific surgical guides on each phantom. They contained a small adaptor for a 3D-printed AR marker, the characteristic patterns of which were easily recognized using both Microsoft HoloLens devices. The newest model improved the AR projection accuracy by almost 25%, and both of them yielded an RMSE below 3 mm. After ascertaining the enhancement of the second model in this aspect, we went a step further with Microsoft HoloLens 2 and tested it during the surgical intervention of one of the patients. During this experience, we collected the surgeons' feedback in terms of comfortability, usability, and ergonomics. Our goal was to estimate whether the improved technical features of the newest model facilitate its implementation in actual surgical scenarios. All of the results point to Microsoft HoloLens 2 being better in all the aspects affecting surgical interventions and support its use in future experiences.

SUBMITTER: Pose-Diez-de-la-Lastra A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9269857 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

HoloLens 1 vs. HoloLens 2: Improvements in the New Model for Orthopedic Oncological Interventions.

Pose-Díez-de-la-Lastra Alicia A Moreta-Martinez Rafael R García-Sevilla Mónica M García-Mato David D Calvo-Haro José Antonio JA Mediavilla-Santos Lydia L Pérez-Mañanes Rubén R von Haxthausen Felix F Pascau Javier J

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) 20220629 13

This work analyzed the use of Microsoft HoloLens 2 in orthopedic oncological surgeries and compares it to its predecessor (Microsoft HoloLens 1). Specifically, we developed two equivalent applications, one for each device, and evaluated the augmented reality (AR) projection accuracy in an experimental scenario using phantoms based on two patients. We achieved automatic registration between virtual and real worlds using patient-specific surgical guides on each phantom. They contained a small adap ...[more]

PMID: 35808407

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCraniosynostosis is a congenital condition characterized by the premature fusion of cranial sutures, leading to potential complications such as abnormal skull growth, increased intracranial pressure, and cognitive delays. Traditionally, open cranial vault reconstruction (OCVR) has been used to treat this condition. However, it is highly subjective and greatly dependent on the surgeon's expertise, which can lead to residual deformities and the need for reoperation. Effective preoperative planning can greatly improve surgical outcomes, although the major challenge is accurately translating this plan into the clinical setting. Recently, augmented reality (AR) and 3D printing have emerged as promising technologies to facilitate this endeavor. In this work, we propose three alternatives, leveraging these technologies, to guide the precise repositioning of remodeled bone fragments in the patient.MethodsThe three guidance methods are AR on a tablet, AR with Microsoft HoloLens 2, and 3D-printed spacers. The accuracy of each method was assessed by measuring the deviation of each bone fragment from the virtual surgical plan (VSP) in a simulated environment using 3D-printed phantoms based on a 14-month-old boy with trigonocephaly. The same assessment was also performed during his actual surgery.ResultsAll three guidance methods demonstrated similar levels of accuracy, with mean placement errors below 1 mm in all cases. The AR systems allowed for real-time adjustments, enhancing precision. Statistical analysis showed no significant differences in error rates between the different methods or attempts.ConclusionsIntegrating AR and 3D printing into craniosynostosis surgery holds great potential for improving OCVR. While 3D-printed spacers are useful when digital technologies are unavailable, AR-based methods provide more comprehensive guidance. Nevertheless, our study suggests that the choice may depend more on the specific clinical context, user-specific skills, and available resources rather than on a clear superiority of one method over the others.

Project description:IntroductionEndovascular aortic repair (EVAR) is a minimal-invasive technique that prevents life-threatening rupture in patients with aortic pathologies by implantation of an endoluminal stent graft. During the endovascular procedure, device navigation is currently performed by fluoroscopy in combination with digital subtraction angiography. This study presents the current iterative process of biomedical engineering within the disruptive interdisciplinary project Nav EVAR, which includes advanced navigation, image techniques and augmented reality with the aim of reducing side effects (namely radiation exposure and contrast agent administration) and optimising visualisation during EVAR procedures. This article describes the current prototype developed in this project and the experiments conducted to evaluate it.MethodsThe current approach of the Nav EVAR project is guiding EVAR interventions in real-time with an electromagnetic tracking system after attaching a sensor on the catheter tip and displaying this information on Microsoft HoloLens glasses. This augmented reality technology enables the visualisation of virtual objects superimposed on the real environment. These virtual objects include three-dimensional (3D) objects (namely 3D models of the skin and vascular structures) and two-dimensional (2D) objects [namely orthogonal views of computed tomography (CT) angiograms, 2D images of 3D vascular models, and 2D images of a new virtual angioscopy whose appearance of the vessel wall follows that shown in ex vivo and in vivo angioscopies]. Specific external markers were designed to be used as landmarks in the registration process to map the tracking data and radiological data into a common space. In addition, the use of real-time 3D ultrasound (US) is also under evaluation in the Nav EVAR project for guiding endovascular tools and updating navigation with intraoperative imaging. US volumes are streamed from the US system to HoloLens and visualised at a certain distance from the probe by tracking augmented reality markers. A human model torso that includes a 3D printed patient-specific aortic model was built to provide a realistic test environment for evaluation of technical components in the Nav EVAR project. The solutions presented in this study were tested by using an US training model and the aortic-aneurysm phantom.ResultsDuring the navigation of the catheter tip in the US training model, the 3D models of the phantom surface and vessels were visualised on HoloLens. In addition, a virtual angioscopy was also built from a CT scan of the aortic-aneurysm phantom. The external markers designed for this study were visible in the CT scan and the electromagnetically tracked pointer fitted in each marker hole. US volumes of the US training model were sent from the US system to HoloLens in order to display them, showing a latency of 259±86 ms (mean±standard deviation).ConclusionThe Nav EVAR project tackles the problem of radiation exposure and contrast agent administration during EVAR interventions by using a multidisciplinary approach to guide the endovascular tools. Its current state presents several limitations such as the rigid alignment between preoperative data and the simulated patient. Nevertheless, the techniques shown in this study in combination with fibre Bragg gratings and optical coherence tomography are a promising approach to overcome the problems of EVAR interventions.

Dataset Information

HoloLens 1 vs. HoloLens 2: Improvements in the New Model for Orthopedic Oncological Interventions.

Publications

HoloLens 1 vs. HoloLens 2: Improvements in the New Model for Orthopedic Oncological Interventions.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets