ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2026
Enhancing ultrasound augmentation of laparoscopic video using hybrid electromagnetic-ArUco tracking.
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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis work aims to develop and validate a hybrid electromagnetic(EM)-ArUco tracking framework integrated into a laparoscopic ultrasound augmentation system, aiming to improve accuracy, stability, and robustness in intraoperative visualization.
methodsA novel hybrid tracking method was developed that combines continuous hardware-based EM tracking with accurate but intermittent computer vision-based ArUco marker tracking, utilizing dynamically computed correction matrices to optimize the real-time spatial alignment of ultrasound and laparoscopic images. Validation involved three experiments: image-based analysis measuring pixel error between projected and ground-truth needle tips, target registration error analysis quantifying the distance between an EM- tracked stylus tip and the inverse projection from the ultrasound, and an ex vivo tissue experiment to assess distortions in a simulated clinical environment.
resultsHybrid tracking demonstrated a significant reduction in tracking error compared to EM tracking alone. Hybrid tracking reduced projection error from 116 ± 49 px to 49 ± 18 px and decreased registration error from 2.1 ± 0.9 mm to 1.1 ± 0.6 mm. Under the influence of externally applied distortion, hybrid tracking improved tracking accuracy by approximately 62.3%. The system also exhibited robustness to camera rotation and zoom changes during periodic ArUco marker detection.
conclusionThe hybrid tracking framework significantly improved accuracy, stability, and robustness compared to EM tracking. This integration has the potential to enhance intraoperative visualization, thereby contributing to safer and more effective minimally invasive surgeries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42250194What 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.