Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35168103›Full record

SynthesisMedical image analysis2022

Utility of optical see-through head mounted displays in augmented reality-assisted surgery: A systematic review.

Manuel Birlo, P J Eddie Edwards, Matthew Clarkson, Danail Stoyanov

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medical image analysis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

42 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Using Hologram-Based Augmented Reality in Anatomy Learning: The TEACHANATOMY Randomized Trial.Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges · 2025
    Trial
  7. Markerless augmented reality registration for surgical guidance: a multi-anatomy clinical accuracy study.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  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

4 authors.

Manuel BirloWellcome/EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences (WEISS), University College London (UCL), Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, UK. Electronic address: manuel.birlo.18@ucl.ac.uk.
P J Eddie EdwardsWellcome/EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences (WEISS), University College London (UCL), Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, UK.
Matthew ClarksonWellcome/EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences (WEISS), University College London (UCL), Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, UK.
Danail StoyanovWellcome/EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences (WEISS), University College London (UCL), Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, UK.

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 203145Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article presents a systematic review of optical see-through head mounted display (OST-HMD) usage in augmented reality (AR) surgery applications from 2013 to 2020. Articles were categorised by: OST-HMD device, surgical speciality, surgical application context, visualisation content, experimental design and evaluation, accuracy and human factors of human-computer interaction. 91 articles fulfilled all inclusion criteria. Some clear trends emerge. The Microsoft HoloLens increasingly dominates the field, with orthopaedic surgery being the most popular application (28.6%). By far the most common surgical context is surgical guidance (n=58) and segmented preoperative models dominate visualisation (n=40). Experiments mainly involve phantoms (n=43) or system setup (n=21), with patient case studies ranking third (n=19), reflecting the comparative infancy of the field. Experiments cover issues from registration to perception with very different accuracy results. Human factors emerge as significant to OST-HMD utility. Some factors are addressed by the systems proposed, such as attention shift away from the surgical site and mental mapping of 2D images to 3D patient anatomy. Other persistent human factors remain or are caused by OST-HMD solutions, including ease of use, comfort and spatial perception issues. The significant upward trend in published articles is clear, but such devices are not yet established in the operating room and clinical studies showing benefit are lacking. A focused effort addressing technical registration and perceptual factors in the lab coupled with design that incorporates human factors considerations to solve clear clinical problems should ensure that the significant current research efforts will succeed.

Indexed as

Augmented RealityOrthopedicsSmart GlassesSurgery, Computer-AssistedHumansPhantoms, ImagingAugmented realityHead-mounted displaysHuman factorsOptical see-through

Identifiers

PMID35168103
PMCPMC10466024

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.