2016
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-29965-5_9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

2D/3D Real-Time Tracking of Surgical Instruments Based on Endoscopic Image Processing

Abstract: International audienceThis paper describes a simple and robust algorithm which permits to track surgical instruments without artificial markers in endoscopic images. Based on image processing, this algorithm can estimate the 2D/3D pose of all the instruments visible in the image, in real-time (30 Hz). The originality of the approach is based on the use of a Frangi filter for detecting edges and the tip of instruments. The accuracy of the instruments’ location in the image is evaluated using an extensive datase… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
20
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The comparison of 3D trajectories in Figure 5 and Table 1 proves their close fit: the mean errors in X-Y-Z directions are less than 3 mm, while their standard deviations imply the proposed method's strong robustness to noise interference. As shown in Figure 6, the maximal 3D error of the proposed method is about 5 mm, which is even less than the mean error in [9]. The collinear hypothesis used in the Equation (4) accounts for the small errors in X-Y coordinates: insofar as the insertion point is included in the estimation of tracking position, the errors of Z coordinates are well-controlled (less than 1 mm).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 89%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The comparison of 3D trajectories in Figure 5 and Table 1 proves their close fit: the mean errors in X-Y-Z directions are less than 3 mm, while their standard deviations imply the proposed method's strong robustness to noise interference. As shown in Figure 6, the maximal 3D error of the proposed method is about 5 mm, which is even less than the mean error in [9]. The collinear hypothesis used in the Equation (4) accounts for the small errors in X-Y coordinates: insofar as the insertion point is included in the estimation of tracking position, the errors of Z coordinates are well-controlled (less than 1 mm).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…These methods are accurate in tracking and efficient in computation, but suffer from unresolved issues of color and lighting variations. Some other vision-based methods exploit the geometric constraints [8] and the gradientlike features [9,10], in order to identify the shaft of instrument, but fail to provide more accurate 3D positions of the instrument tip. Machine learning techniques [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19] introduced into the instrument detection and tracking provide training of their discriminative classifiers/models according to the input visual features of the foreground (instrument tip or shaft).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Conventional methods use low-level features to locate instruments in images [4]. For instance, Augustine and Voros [5] proposed a simple and robust algorithm to estimate the 2D/3D pose of instruments based on image processing. Another example is the study by Rieke et al [6], which employed the RGB and HOG feature of the instrument for the detection task.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Certain instruments that employ robot kinematic information from joint encoders to track the movements of an entire surgical instrument [4] are typically fast and robust, since they can recover when the instruments are occluded by tissue, smoke or shadows from other instruments, however, the accumulation of errors can result in a significantly large aggregate error [5]. The method of extracting image features with gradients [6] can accurately render partial surgical tool features, however, it has two disadvantages: one being that gradients are sensitive to noise, illumination and shadows [7], while the other is that the gradient distribution rate is difficult to obtain [8]. In addition, the methods of template matching by learning [9,10], can accurately extract features from image patches and quickly and robustly track the instruments, since they use a paradigm of pre-training to carry out image matching.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%