Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30953169›Full record

ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2019

Implementation of augmented reality support in spine surgery.

Barbara Carl, Miriam Bopp, Benjamin Saß, Benjamin Voellger, Christopher Nimsky

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

50 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 110 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Minimally invasive endoscopy in spine surgery: where are we now?European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Barbara CarlDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Marburg, Baldingerstrasse, 35033, Marburg, Germany. carlb@med.uni-marburg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3661-9908
Miriam BoppDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Marburg, Baldingerstrasse, 35033, Marburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1574-7572
Benjamin SaßDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Marburg, Baldingerstrasse, 35033, Marburg, Germany.
Benjamin VoellgerDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Marburg, Baldingerstrasse, 35033, Marburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8615-5393
Christopher NimskyDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Marburg, Baldingerstrasse, 35033, Marburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8216-9410
Philipps University of Marburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo implement a straightforward workflow that allows to establish augmented reality (AR) support in spine surgery.

methodsIntraoperative computed tomography (iCT) applying a 32-slice movable scanner was used for navigation registration in a series of 10 patients who underwent surgery for extra- or intradural spinal lesions. Preoperative multimodal image data were integrated by nonlinear registration with the iCT images. Automatic segmentation was used to delineate the 3-dimensional (3-D) outline of the vertebra, and in addition, the tumor extent, as well as implants, was segmented and visualized.

resultsAutomatic patient registration without user interaction resulted in high navigation accuracy with a mean registration error of only about 1 mm. Moreover, the workflow for establishing AR was straightforward and could be easily integrated in the normal surgical procedure. Low-dose iCT protocols resulted in a radiation exposure of 0.35-0.98 mSv for cervical, 2.16-6.92 mSv for thoracic, and 3.55-4.20 mSv for lumbar surgeries, which is a reduction in the effective radiation dose by 70%. The segmented structures were intuitively visualized in the surgical field using the heads-up display of the operating microscope. In parallel, the microscope video was superimposed with the segmented 3-D structures, which were visualized in a semitransparent manner along with various display modes of the image data.

conclusionsA microscope-based AR environment was successfully implemented for spinal surgery. The application of iCT for registration imaging ensures high navigational accuracy. AR greatly supports the surgeon in understanding the 3-D anatomy thereby facilitating surgery. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Indexed as

Augmented RealityImaging, Three-DimensionalMultidetector Computed TomographyAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOrthopedic ProceduresOutcome Assessment, Health CareRetrospective StudiesSpineSurgery, Computer-AssistedAugmented realityIntraoperative computed tomographyLow-dose computed tomographyNavigation registrationSpine tumor surgery

Identifiers

PMID30953169
OpenAlexW2929853457

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.