ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023
Preclinical Application of Augmented Reality in Pediatric Craniofacial Surgery: An Accuracy Study.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Augmented reality for orthopedic and maxillofacial oncological surgery: a systematic review focusing on both clinical and technical aspects.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Pooled it
- Augmented reality vs CAD/CAM system in orthognathic surgery: development and accuracy evaluation.Maxillofacial plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2025Article
- An attempt to evaluate the use of mixed reality in surgically treated pediatric oncology patients.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Application of Augmented Reality Navigation in Craniofacial Surgery for Fibrous Dysplasia.Journal of neurological surgery reports · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence Applications in Pediatric Craniofacial Surgery.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Is Overlain Display a Right Choice for AR Navigation? A Qualitative Study of Head-Mounted Augmented Reality Surgical Navigation on Accuracy for Large-Scale Clinical Deployment.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2025Review
- Enhancing Surgical Vision: Augmented Reality in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.Journal of medical extended reality · 2024Review
- Surgical treatment of orbital tumors in a single center: Analysis and results.Surgical neurology international · 2024Article
- Augmented Reality in Neurosurgery: A New Paradigm for Training.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Review
- Exploring the Potential of Three-Dimensional Imaging, Printing, and Modeling in Pediatric Surgical Oncology: A New Era of Precision Surgery.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAugmented reality (AR) allows the overlapping and integration of virtual information with the real environment. The camera of the AR device reads the object and integrates the virtual data. It has been widely applied to medical and surgical sciences in recent years and has the potential to enhance intraoperative navigation. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this study, the authors aim to assess the accuracy of AR guidance when using the commercial HoloLens 2 head-mounted display (HMD) in pediatric craniofacial surgery. The Authors selected fronto-orbital remodeling (FOR) as the procedure to test (specifically, frontal osteotomy and nasal osteotomy were considered). Six people (three surgeons and three engineers) were recruited to perform the osteotomies on a 3D printed stereolithographic model under the guidance of AR. By means of calibrated CAD/CAM cutting guides with different grooves, the authors measured the accuracy of the osteotomies that were performed. We tested accuracy levels of ±1.5 mm, ±1 mm, and ±0.5 mm.
resultsWith the HoloLens 2, the majority of the individuals involved were able to successfully trace the trajectories of the frontal and nasal osteotomies with an accuracy level of ±1.5 mm. Additionally, 80% were able to achieve an accuracy level of ±1 mm when performing a nasal osteotomy, and 52% were able to achieve an accuracy level of ±1 mm when performing a frontal osteotomy, while 61% were able to achieve an accuracy level of ±0.5 mm when performing a nasal osteotomy, and 33% were able to achieve an accuracy level of ±0.5 mm when performing a frontal osteotomy.
conclusionsdespite this being an in vitro study, the authors reported encouraging results for the prospective use of AR on actual patients.
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.