ArticleSkeletal radiology2024
Smartphone application with 3D-printed needle guide for faster and more accurate CT-guided interventions in a phantom.
Article in Skeletal radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrated Needle Guide on Smartphone for Percutaneous Interventions Using Augmented Reality.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2025Article
- Smartphone Technology for Applications in Image-Guided Minimally Invasive Interventional Procedures.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2025Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study is to determine whether a needle guidance device combining a 3D-printed component with a smartphone would decrease the number of passes and time required to perform a standard CT-guided needle procedure in a phantom study. MATERIALS AND
methodsA 3D-printed mechanical guide with built-in apertures for various needle sizes was designed and printed. It was mounted on a smartphone and used to direct commercially available spring-loaded biopsy devices. A smartphone software application was developed to use the phone's sensors to provide the real-time location of a lesion in space, based on parameters derived from preprocedural CT images. The physical linkage of the guide, smartphone, and needle allowed the operator to manipulate the assembly as a single unit, with real-time graphical representation of the lesion shown on the smartphone display. Two radiology trainees and 3 staff radiologists targeted 5 lesions with and without the device (50 total procedures). The number of passes and time taken to reach each lesion were determined.
resultsUse of the smartphone needle guide decreased the mean number of passes (with guide, 1.8; without guide, 3.4; P < 0.001) and mean time taken (with guide, 1.6 min; without guide, 2.7 min; P = 0.005) to perform a standard CT-guided procedure. On average, the decreases in number of passes and procedure time were more pronounced among trainees (P < 0.001).
conclusionThe combination of a mechanical guide and smartphone can reduce the number of needle passes and the amount of time needed to reach a lesion in a phantom for both trainees and experienced radiologists.
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.