Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36149736›Full record

ArticleJMIR serious games2022

Augmented Reality in Vascular and Endovascular Surgery: Scoping Review.

Joshua Eves, Abhilash Sudarsanam, Joseph Shalhoub, Dimitri Amiras

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR serious games, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
10.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Wearable headset-assisted fluoroscopic visualization during complex endovascular aortic repair.Journal of vascular surgery cases and innovative techniques · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Joshua Eves *Imperial Vascular Unit, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7165-4659
Abhilash SudarsanamImperial Vascular Unit, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2211-4191
Joseph ShalhoubImperial Vascular Unit, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1011-7440
Dimitri Amiras *Department of Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6144-0048
Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTechnological advances have transformed vascular intervention in recent decades. In particular, improvements in imaging and data processing have allowed for the development of increasingly complex endovascular and hybrid interventions. Augmented reality (AR) is a subject of growing interest in surgery, with the potential to improve clinicians' understanding of 3D anatomy and aid in the processing of real-time information. This study hopes to elucidate the potential impact of AR technology in the rapidly evolving fields of vascular and endovascular surgery.

objectiveThe aim of this review is to summarize the fundamental concepts of AR technologies and conduct a scoping review of the impact of AR and mixed reality in vascular and endovascular surgery.

methodsA systematic search of MEDLINE, Scopus, and Embase was performed in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. All studies written in English from inception until January 8, 2021, were included in the search. Combinations of the following keywords were used in the systematic search string: ("augmented reality" OR "hololens" OR "image overlay" OR "daqri" OR "magic leap" OR "immersive reality" OR "extended reality" OR "mixed reality" OR "head mounted display") AND ("vascular surgery" OR "endovascular"). Studies were selected through a blinded process between 2 investigators (JE and AS) and assessed using data quality tools.

resultsAR technologies have had a number of applications in vascular and endovascular surgery. Most studies (22/32, 69%) used 3D imaging of computed tomography angiogram-derived images of vascular anatomy to augment clinicians' anatomical understanding during procedures. A wide range of AR technologies were used, with heads up fusion imaging and AR head-mounted displays being the most commonly applied clinically. AR applications included guiding open, robotic, and endovascular surgery while minimizing dissection, improving procedural times, and reducing radiation and contrast exposure.

conclusionsAR has shown promising developments in the field of vascular and endovascular surgery, with potential benefits to surgeons and patients alike. These include reductions in patient risk and operating times as well as in contrast and radiation exposure for radiological interventions. Further technological advances are required to overcome current limitations, including processing capacity and vascular deformation by instrumentation.

Indexed as

augmented realityendovascularhead-mounted displaymobile phonesurgeryvascular

Identifiers

PMID36149736
PMCPMC9547335
OpenAlexW4285342003

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.