ArticleJournal of imaging2022
Towards a First-Person Perspective Mixed Reality Guidance System for Needle Interventions.
Article in Journal of imaging, 2022. 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, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing Different Registration and Visualization Methods for Navigated Common Femoral Arterial Access-A Phantom Model Study Using Mixed Reality.Journal of imaging · 2024Article
- Simulation of Image-Guided Microwave Ablation Therapy Using a Digital Twin Computational Model.IEEE open journal of engineering in medicine and biology · 2024Article
- Augmenting Image-Guided Procedures through In Situ Visualization of 3D Ultrasound via a Head-Mounted Display.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Mixed-Reality-Assisted Puncture of the Common Femoral Artery in a Phantom Model.Journal of imaging · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
While ultrasound (US) guidance has been used during central venous catheterization to reduce complications, including the puncturing of arteries, the rate of such problems remains non-negligible. To further reduce complication rates, mixed-reality systems have been proposed as part of the user interface for such procedures. We demonstrate the use of a surgical navigation system that renders a calibrated US image, and the needle and its trajectory, in a common frame of reference. We compare the effectiveness of this system, whereby images are rendered on a planar monitor and within a head-mounted display (HMD), to the standard-of-care US-only approach, via a phantom-based user study that recruited 31 expert clinicians and 20 medical students. These users performed needle-insertions into a phantom under the three modes of visualization. The success rates were significantly improved under HMD-guidance as compared to US-guidance, for both expert clinicians (94% vs. 70%) and medical students (70% vs. 25%). Users more consistently positioned their needle closer to the center of the vessel's lumen under HMD-guidance compared to US-guidance. The performance of the clinicians when interacting with this monitor system was comparable to using US-only guidance, with no significant difference being observed across any metrics. The results suggest that the use of an HMD to align the clinician's visual and motor fields promotes successful needle guidance, highlighting the importance of continued HMD-guidance research.
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.