ArticleSurgical innovation2024
Mixed Reality Surgical Navigation System; Positional Accuracy Based on Food and Drug Administration Standard.
Article in Surgical innovation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mixed reality assisted target localization for transcranial magnetic stimulation navigation: a feasibility study.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Assessing the accuracy of 3D assistive technologies for surgical guidance of osteosarcoma resections: a comparative laboratory study of mixed reality, patient-specific instruments and freehand approaches.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2026Article
- Intraoperative use of mixed reality (MR) in humans across surgical disciplines: a major review.3D printing in medicine · 2025Article
- Accuracy of a novel mixed reality surgical platform for total knee arthroplasty.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2025Article
- Mixed reality guidance in osteotomy provides superior precision and accuracy: validation and comparative study.International orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Three-dimensional volumetric rendering on augmented reality headsets for ovarian cancer cytoreduction planning: A Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Team Ovary study.Gynecologic oncology · 2025Article
- Augmented reality in brachytherapy: A narrative review.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundComputer assisted surgical navigation systems are designed to improve outcomes by providing clinicians with procedural guidance information. The use of new technologies, such as mixed reality, offers the potential for more intuitive, efficient, and accurate procedural guidance. The goal of this study is to assess the positional accuracy and consistency of a clinical mixed reality system that utilizes commercially available wireless head-mounted displays (HMDs), custom software, and localization instruments.
methodsIndependent teams using the second-generation Microsoft HoloLens
resultsThe system demonstrated consistent results, with an average accuracy performance that was better than one millimeter (.75 ± SD .37 mm).
conclusionIndependently acquired positional tracking accuracies exceed conventional in-market surgical navigation tracking systems and FDA standards. Importantly, the performance was achieved at two different institutions, using an international testing standard, and with a system that included a commercially available off-the-shelf wireless head mounted display and software.
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.