ArticleMedical physics2023
Evaluation of a calibration rig for stereo laparoscopes.
Article in Medical physics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing augmented reality displays in laparoscopic liver surgery - a clinical experience.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Deep hashing for global registration of preoperative CT and video images for laparoscopic liver surgery.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2025Article
- Augmented reality system for endoscopic pituitary surgery with automatic registration.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2025Article
- Can engineers represent surgeons in usability studies? Comparison of results from evaluating augmented reality guidance for laparoscopic surgery.Computers & graphics · 2024Article
- The value of Augmented Reality in surgery - A usability study on laparoscopic liver surgery.Medical image analysis · 2023Article
- Evaluation of a calibration rig for stereo laparoscopes.Medical physics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAccurate camera and hand-eye calibration are essential to ensure high-quality results in image-guided surgery applications. The process must also be able to be undertaken by a nonexpert user in a surgical setting. PURPOSE: This work seeks to identify a suitable method for tracked stereo laparoscope calibration within theater.
methodsA custom calibration rig, to enable rapid calibration in a surgical setting, was designed. The rig was compared against freehand calibration. Stereo reprojection, stereo reconstruction, tracked stereo reprojection, and tracked stereo reconstruction error metrics were used to evaluate calibration quality.
resultsUse of the calibration rig reduced mean errors: reprojection (1.47 mm [SD 0.13] vs. 3.14 mm [SD 2.11], p-value 1e-8), reconstruction (1.37 px [SD 0.10] vs. 10.10 px [SD 4.54], p-value 6e-7), and tracked reconstruction (1.38 mm [SD 0.10] vs. 12.64 mm [SD 4.34], p-value 1e-6) compared with freehand calibration. The use of a ChArUco pattern yielded slightly lower reprojection errors, while a dot grid produced lower reconstruction errors and was more robust under strong global illumination.
conclusionThe use of the calibration rig results in a statistically significant decrease in calibration error metrics, versus freehand calibration, and represents the preferred approach for use in the operating theater.
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.