ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2026
Augmented reality for intraoperative verification of surgical template placement.
Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposePatient-specific templates (STs) are widely adopted to guide drilling and cutting in orthopaedic procedures. Their intraoperative placement typically relies on visual and tactile assessment, without feedback on positioning accuracy. This work proposes a minimal, low-cost augmented reality (AR) method for intraoperative verification of template placement, designed for the brief and constrained nature of this task.
methodsA miniature camera is rigidly mounted on the surgical template and preoperatively calibrated. During placement, live images are augmented with virtual renderings of the patient's bone model, generated from preoperative CT/MR data and displayed from the same fixed viewpoint. Correct alignment occurs only when the template reaches its planned pose, without requiring tracking systems, registration procedures, or head-mounted displays. Template placement was evaluated on a patient-specific phantom by thirteen participants, with and without AR guidance. Feasibility was further assessed through ex vivo tests on animal tissue involving seven users.
resultsIn phantom experiments, AR guidance was associated with improved placement accuracy (mean error 2.23 mm vs. 3.62 mm without AR, p = 0.0093). In ex vivo trials, all AR-guided osteotomy lines remained within ±2 mm of the planned trajectory suggesting experimental feasibility. However, the difference between conditions did not reach statistical significance.
conclusionCurrent literature lacks simple, inexpensive, and workflow-compatible methods for verifying the placement of surgical templates. The proposed approach may provide a simple method for intraoperative visual feedback without tracking hardware or complex AR systems, potentially supporting more consistent template positioning. However, its effectiveness may depend on surgical exposure and anatomical context.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42053864What 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.