Smartphone- versus smartglasses-based augmented reality (AR) for percutaneous needle interventions: system accuracy and
- PDF / 1,663,251 Bytes
- 10 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 15 Downloads / 157 Views
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Smartphone‑ versus smartglasses‑based augmented reality (AR) for percutaneous needle interventions: system accuracy and feasibility study Ming Li1 · Reza Seifabadi1 · Dilara Long1 · Quirina De Ruiter1 · Nicole Varble1,2 · Rachel Hecht1 · Ayele H. Negussie1 · Venkatesh Krishnasamy1 · Sheng Xu1 · Bradford J. Wood1 Received: 3 February 2020 / Accepted: 14 July 2020 © This is a U.S. government work and not under copyright protection in the U.S.; foreign copyright protection may apply 2020
Abstract Purpose To compare the system accuracy and needle placement performance of smartphone- and smartglasses-based augmented reality (AR) for percutaneous needle interventions. Methods An AR platform was developed to enable the superimposition of annotated anatomy and a planned needle trajectory onto a patient in real time. The system accuracy of the AR display on smartphone (iPhone7) and smartglasses (HoloLens1) devices was evaluated on a 3D-printed phantom. The target overlay error was measured as the distance between actual and virtual targets (n = 336) on the AR display, derived from preprocedural CT. The needle overlay angle was measured as the angular difference between actual and virtual needles (n = 12) on the AR display. Three operators each used the iPhone (n = 8), HoloLens (n = 8) and CT-guided freehand (n = 8) to guide needles into targets in a phantom. Needle placement error was measured with post-placement CT. Needle placement time was recorded from needle puncture to navigation completion. Results The target overlay error of the iPhone was comparable to the HoloLens (1.75 ± 0.59 mm, 1.74 ± 0.86 mm, respectively, p = 0.9). The needle overlay angle of the iPhone and HoloLens was similar (0.28 ± 0.32°, 0.41 ± 0.23°, respectively, p = 0.26). The iPhone-guided needle placements showed reduced error compared to the HoloLens (2.58 ± 1.04 mm, 3.61 ± 2.25 mm, respectively, p = 0.05) and increased time (87 ± 17 s, 71 ± 27 s, respectively, p = 0.02). Both AR devices reduced placement error compared to CT-guided freehand (15.92 ± 8.06 mm, both p
Data Loading...
