Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37072658›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2023

In situ guidance for MRI interventions using projected feedback.

Pezhman Foroughi, Alican Demir, Martin Hossbach, Purnima Rajan, Pavel Yarmolenko, Ranjith Vellody, Kevin Cleary, Karun Sharma

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Pezhman ForoughiClear Guide Medical Inc., Baltimore, MD, 21211, USA. foroughi@clearguidemedical.com.
Alican DemirClear Guide Medical Inc., Baltimore, MD, 21211, USA.
Martin HossbachClear Guide Medical Inc., Baltimore, MD, 21211, USA.
Purnima RajanClear Guide Medical Inc., Baltimore, MD, 21211, USA.
Pavel YarmolenkoChildren's National, Washington, DC, 20010, USA.
Ranjith VellodyChildren's National, Washington, DC, 20010, USA.
Kevin ClearyChildren's National, Washington, DC, 20010, USA.
Karun SharmaChildren's National, Washington, DC, 20010, USA.
Children's National · USClear Guide Medical (United States) · US

Funding

Augmented Reality Real-Time Guidance for MRI-Guided InterventionsR44EB028722 · NIBIB · CLEAR GUIDE MEDICAL, INC. · PI RAJAN, PURNIMA · 2022 to 2023
$2.7M
Augmented Reality Real-Time Guidance for MRI InterventionsR43EB028722 · NIBIB · CLEAR GUIDE MEDICAL, INC. · PI RAJAN, PURNIMA · 2020 to 2020
$251k
NIBIB NIH HHS R43 EB028722NIH HHS 1R43EB028722-01A1NIH HHS 2R44EB028722-02A1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo develop and evaluate an augmented reality instrument guidance system for MRI-guided needle placement procedures such as musculoskeletal biopsy and arthrography. Our system guides the physician to insert a needle toward a target while looking at the insertion site without requiring special headgear.

methodsThe system is comprised of a pair of stereo cameras, a projector, and a computational unit with a touch screen. All components are designed to be used within the MRI suite (Zone 4). Multi-modality fiducial markers called VisiMARKERs, detectable in both MRI and camera images, facilitate automatic registration after the initial scan. The navigation feedback is projected directly onto the intervention site allowing the interventionalist to keep their focus on the insertion site instead of a secondary monitor which is often not in front of them.

resultsWe evaluated the feasibility and accuracy of this system on custom-built shoulder phantoms. Two radiologists used the system to select targets and entry points on initial MRIs of these phantoms over three sessions. They performed 80 needle insertions following the projected guidance. The system targeting error was 1.09 mm, and the overall error was 2.29 mm.

conclusionWe demonstrated both feasibility and accuracy of this MRI navigation system. The system operated without any problems inside the MRI suite close to the MRI bore. The two radiologists were able to easily follow the guidance and place the needle close to the target without any intermediate imaging.

Indexed as

Augmented RealityNeedlesFeedbackHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingPhantoms, ImagingAugmented realityGuidanceMRI interventionNavigationProjectorTracking

Identifiers

PMID37072658
PMCPMC13231457
OpenAlexW4366260210

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.