ArticleFrontiers in robotics and AI2020
Augmented Reality Guided Needle Biopsy of Soft Tissue: A Pilot Study.
Article in Frontiers in robotics and AI, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Training strategies for neck ultrasound examination and ultrasound-guided cervical lymph node biopsies: a narrative review.BMC medical education · 2026Review
- Design and Evaluation of Augmented Reality-Enhanced Robotic System for Epidural Interventions.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Augmented Reality-Assisted Ultrasound Breast Biopsy.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Perception by Palpation: Development and Testing of a Haptic Ferrogranular Jamming Surface.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Percutaneous biopsies are popular for extracting suspicious tissue formations (primarily for cancer diagnosis purposes) due to the: relatively low cost, minimal invasiveness, quick procedure times, and low risk for the patient. Despite the advantages provided by percutaneous biopsies, poor needle and tumor visualization is a problem that can result in the clinicians classifying the tumor as benign when it was malignant (false negative). The system developed by the authors aims to address the concern of poor needle and tumor visualization through two virtualization setups. This system is designed to track and visualize the needle and tumor in three-dimensional space using an electromagnetic tracking system. User trials were conducted in which the 10 participants, who were not medically trained, performed a total of 6 tests, each guiding the biopsy needle to the desired location. The users guided the biopsy needle to the desired point on an artificial spherical tumor (diameters of 30, 20, and 10 mm) using the 3D augmented reality (AR) overlay for three trials and a projection on a second monitor (TV) for the other three trials. From the randomized trials, it was found that the participants were able to guide the needle tip 6.5 ± 3.3 mm away from the desired position with an angle deviation of 1.96 ± 1.10° in the AR trials, compared to values of 4.5 ± 2.3 mm and 2.70 ± 1.67° in the TV trials. The results indicate that for simple stationary surgical procedures, an AR display is non-inferior a TV display.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.