Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35360432›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in surgery2022

Augmented Reality in Neurosurgery, State of Art and Future Projections. A Systematic Review.

Delia Cannizzaro, Ismail Zaed, Adrian Safa, Alice J M Jelmoni, Antonio Composto, Andrea Bisoglio, Kyra Schmeizer, Ana C Becker, Andrea Pizzi, Andrea Cardia and 1 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 63 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
63citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

63 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Delia CannizzaroDepartment of Neurosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy.
Ismail ZaedDepartment of Neurosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy.
Adrian SafaDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Italy.
Alice J M JelmoniDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Italy.
Antonio CompostoDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Italy.
Andrea BisoglioDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Italy.
Kyra SchmeizerDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Italy.
Ana C BeckerDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Italy.
Andrea PizziDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Italy.
Andrea CardiaDepartment of Neurosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy.
Franco ServadeiDepartment of Neurosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The use of augmented reality (AR) is growing in medical education, in particular, in radiology and surgery. AR has the potential to become a strategic component of neurosurgical training courses. In fact, over the years, there has been a progressive increase in the application of AR in the various fields of neurosurgery. In this study, the authors aim to define the diffusion of these augmented reality systems in recent years. This study describes future trends in augmented reality for neurosurgeons. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was conducted to identify research published from December 1st, 2011 to November 30th, 2021. Electronic databases (PubMed, PubMed Central, and Scopus) were screened. The methodological quality of studies and extracted data were assessed for "augmented reality" and "neurosurgery". The data analysis focused on the geographical distribution, temporal evolution, and topic of augmented reality in neurosurgery. Results: A total of 198 studies have been included. The number of augmented reality applications in the neurosurgical field has increased during the last 10 years. The main topics on which it is mostly applied are spine surgery, neuronavigation, and education. The geographical distribution shows extensive use of augmented reality in the USA, Germany, China, and Canada. North America is the continent that uses augmented reality the most in the training and education of medical students, residents, and surgeons, besides giving the greatest research contribution in spine surgery, brain oncology, and surgical planning. AR is also extensively used in Asia for intraoperative navigation. Nevertheless, augmented reality is still far from reaching Africa and other countries with limited facilities, as no publications could be retrieved from our search. Conclusions: The use of AR is significantly increased in the last 10 years. Nowadays it is mainly used in spine surgery and for neurosurgical education, especially in North America, Europe and China. A continuous growth, also in other aspects of the specialty, is expected in the next future.

Indexed as

augmented realitycranial surgeryeducationneurosurgeryspine surgerytraining

Identifiers

PMID35360432
PMCPMC8961734

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.