ArticleCureus2025
Head-Mounted Display-Assisted Spatial Guidance in Ultrasonography: A Technical Report.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ultrasonography (US) is a widely used, real-time imaging modality; however, its effectiveness in the head and neck region can be limited by the complexity of anatomical structures and the operator's experience. Mixed reality (MR) technology, utilizing head-mounted displays (HMDs) to overlay 3D holographic models onto the real environment, has shown potential in medical applications. This preliminary study aims to evaluate a prototype HMD-based system that supports US examinations by providing enhanced spatial guidance through MR visualization. A soft tissue phantom embedded with artificial lesions was scanned with CT to create DICOM datasets, which were reconstructed into 3D holographic models. These models were displayed via a custom MR application developed in Unity Technologies (San Francisco, CA, USA) and operated on Microsoft HoloLens 2 (Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA, USA). Six sonographers were assigned to two groups: Group A (conventional US) and Group B (HMD-assisted US). Each participant performed a scanning task to identify target lesions. Task performance was assessed using two quantitative metrics: the time to complete the scanning task and the number of missed or falsely identified lesions. Statistical analysis was performed using a t-test, with significance set at p < 0.05. Group A relied more on wide scanning and screen observation, whereas Group B focused on holographically indicated regions. The mean task times were 178 seconds for Group A and 293 seconds for Group B, with no significant difference (p = 0.21). Clinical experience was negatively correlated with task time (R = -0.71), indicating that more experienced operators completed the task more quickly. Although Group B showed a trend toward fewer missed or false-positive lesions, this did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.076). The HMD-based MR guidance system provides a feasible approach to support lesion targeting in US examinations. The findings from this preliminary phantom study suggest that MR technology may complement conventional US by enhancing spatial awareness during scanning procedures.
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.