2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2019.10.012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Augmented reality navigation for spinal pedicle screw instrumentation using intraoperative 3D imaging

Abstract: BACKGROUND CONTEXT Due to recent developments in augmented reality with headmounted devices, holograms of a surgical plan can be displayed directly in the surgeon's field of view. To the best of our knowledge, three dimensional (3D) intraoperative fluoroscopy has not been explored for the use with holographic navigation by head-mounted devices in spine surgery. PURPOSE To evaluate the surgical accuracy of holographic pedicle screw navigation by head-mounted device using 3D intraoperative fluoroscopy. STUDY DES… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
52
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 99 publications
(57 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
4
52
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Simultaneously tracking two or more markers as the HMD moves through space can sometimes cause the hologram to wobble and may even require a reboot. Compared with our study, the accuracy and stability proposed by this study are slightly lower than those of our system [40]. In response to the analysis of the future development of AR navigation systems, Urakov et al discussed the potential and limitations of AR in the current state in 2019 [41].…”
Section: Comparison Of Spine Surgery Without Robotic Assistance Basedcontrasting
confidence: 59%
“…Simultaneously tracking two or more markers as the HMD moves through space can sometimes cause the hologram to wobble and may even require a reboot. Compared with our study, the accuracy and stability proposed by this study are slightly lower than those of our system [40]. In response to the analysis of the future development of AR navigation systems, Urakov et al discussed the potential and limitations of AR in the current state in 2019 [41].…”
Section: Comparison Of Spine Surgery Without Robotic Assistance Basedcontrasting
confidence: 59%
“…Visualization of the spine hologram through the HoloLens resulted in > 90% correct screw placement with faster insertion times [62][63][64] and no significant difference in accuracy between ARnavigated screw placement and conventional navigation. 65 Comparable outcomes were reported in a cadaveric study conducted by Urakov et al 66 comparing the accuracy of screw placement with either AR or traditional fluoroscopic guidance. While no major breaches occurred under radiological assistance, the use of HoloLens was accompanied by 3 major medial breaches and 3 major inferior breaches out of 19 screws, suggesting that the system is promising but still needs considerable improvements.…”
Section: Augmented Reality In Spine Surgerymentioning
confidence: 90%
“…Although it is more accurate than the robot-assisted navigation system proposed in our study, there is a large amount of radiation in obtaining perspective images with C-arm, which causes great harm to human. In the same year, Fabio et al used head-mounted augmented reality 3D fluoroscopy to assess the accuracy of holographic pedicle screw navigation [54]. The headmounted navigation device is compared with the most advanced position tracking system, and the final navigation accuracy is 3.4±1.6mm.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%