How to build a patient-specific hybrid simulator for orthopaedic open surgery: Benefits and limits of mixed-reality using the Microsoft hololens

Journal of Healthcare Engineering

Volumn 2018, Issue , 2018, Pages

  Condino, Sara ^a   Turini, Giuseppe ^b   Parchi, Paolo D ^a   Viglialoro, Rosanna M ^a   Piolanti, Nicola ^a   Gesi, Marco ^a   Ferrari, Mauro ^a   Ferrari, Vincenzo ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PISA   (Italy)

^b KETTERING UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTHROPLASTY; AUGMENTED REALITY; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; ERGONOMICS; FEEDBACK; MIXED REALITY; ORTHOPEDICS; SIMULATORS;

AUDIO TECHNOLOGIES; CONSTRUCT VALIDITY; CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT; HIP ARTHROPLASTIES; PHYSICAL COMPONENTS; QUANTITATIVE TESTS; SURGICAL TRAINING PROGRAMS; TARGET APPLICATION;

SURGICAL EQUIPMENT;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CALIBRATION; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; ERGONOMICS; FEMALE; GESTURE; HEAD MOVEMENT; HIP ARTHROPLASTY; HUMAN; MALE; OPEN SURGERY; ORTHOPEDIC SURGERY; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; REGISTRATION; WORKLOAD; ACETABULUM; ANATOMIC MODEL; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; COMPUTER INTERFACE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; HIP REPLACEMENT; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; ORTHOPEDIC EQUIPMENT; PATIENT SIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PROCEDURES; SOFTWARE; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING;

ACETABULUM; ADULT; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, HIP; CALIBRATION; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; MALE; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; MODELS, ANATOMIC; ORTHOPEDIC EQUIPMENT; ORTHOPEDIC PROCEDURES; PATIENT SIMULATION; SOFTWARE; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE;

EID: 85056830826     PISSN: 20402295     EISSN: 20402309     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1155/2018/5435097     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. D. M. Gaba, “The future vision of simulation in health care,” Quality and Safety in Health Care, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. i2-i10, 2004.
2. M. Morgan, A. Aydin, A. Salih, S. Robati, and K. Ahmed, “Current status of simulation-based training tools in orthopedic surgery: a systematic review,” Journal of Surgical Education, vol. 74, no. 4, pp. 698-716, 2017.
3. S. Misra, K. T. Ramesh, and A. M. Okamura, “Modeling of tool-tissue interactions for computer-based surgical simulation: a literature review,” Presence, vol. 17, no. 5, p. 463, 2008.
4. ® Orthopaedic Models, 2017, https://www.sawbones.com/products/orthopaedic-models.html.
5. M. P. Gardner, A. C. Chong, A. G. Pollock, and P. H. Wooley, “Mechanical evaluation of large-size fourth-generation composite femur and tibia models,” Annals of Biomedical Engineering, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 613-620, 2010.
6. A. D. Heiner, “Structural properties of fourth-generation composite femurs and tibias,” Journal of Biomechanics, vol. 41, no. 15, pp. 3282-3284, 2008.
7. A. C. Chong, E. A. Friis, G. P. Ballard, P. J. Czuwala, and F. W. Cooke, “Fatigue performance of composite analogue femur constructs under high activity loading,” Annals of Biomedical Engineering, vol. 35, no. 7, pp. 1196-1205, 2007.
8. P. D. Parchi, V. Ferrari, N. Piolanti et al., “Computer tomography prototyping and virtual procedure simulation in difficult cases of hip replacement surgery,” Surgical Technology International, vol. 23, pp. 228-234, 2013.
9. P. Tack, J. Victor, P. Gemmel, and L. Annemans, “3D-printing techniques in a medical setting: a systematic literature review,” Biomedical Engineering Online, vol. 15, no. 1, p. 115, 2016.
10. S. M. Botden and J. J. Jakimowicz, “What is going on in augmented reality simulation in laparoscopic surgery?,” Surgical Endoscopy, vol. 23, no. 8, pp. 1693-1700, 2009.
11. N. Vaughan, V. N. Dubey, T. W. Wainwright, and R. G. Middleton, “A review of virtual reality based training simulators for orthopaedic surgery,” Medical Engineering and Physics, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 59-71, 2016.
12. M. Carbone, S. Condino, L. Mattei, P. Forte, V. Ferrari, and F. Mosca, “Anthropomorphic ultrasound elastography phantoms-characterization of silicone materials to build breast elastography phantoms,” in Proceedings of Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society Conference, vol. 2012, pp. 492-494, San Diego, CA, USA, August 2012.
13. J. B. Nysaether, E. Dorph, I. Rafoss, and P. A. Steen, “Manikins with human-like chest properties-a new tool for chest compression research,” IEEE Transactions on Bio-Medical Engineering, vol. 55, no. 11, pp. 2643-2650, 2008.
14. J. L. Sparks, N. A. Vavalle, K. E. Kasting et al., “Use of silicone materials to simulate tissue biomechanics as related to deep tissue injury,” Advances in Skin & Wound Care, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 59-68, 2015.
15. M. Carbone, S. Condino, V. Ferrari, M. Ferrari, and F. Mosca, “Surgical simulators integrating virtual and physical anatomies,” in Proceedings of CEUR Workshop, pp. 13-18, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2011.
16. S. Condino, M. Carbone, V. Ferrari et al., “How to build patient-specific synthetic abdominal anatomies. An innovative approach from physical toward hybrid surgical simulators,” International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 202-213, 2011.
17. R. Viglialoro, S. Condino, M. Gesi, M. Ferrari, and V. Ferrari, “Augmented reality simulator for laparoscopic cholecystec-tomy training,” in Augmented and Virtual Reality: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, L. T. De Paolis and A. Mongelli, Eds., pp. 428-433, Springer International Publishing, New York, NY, USA, 2014.
18. V. Ferrari, R. M. Viglialoro, P. Nicoli et al., “Augmented reality visualization of deformable tubular structures for surgical simulation,” International Journal of Medical Robotics + Computer Assisted Surgery: MRCAS, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 231-240, 2015.
19. R. Viglialoro, S. Condino, C. Freschi et al., “AR visualization of “synthetic Calot's triangle” for training in cholecystec-tomy,” in Proceedings of 12th IASTED International Conference on Biomedical Engineering, BioMed 2016, pp. 85-89, Innsbruck, Austria, February 2016.
20. F. Cutolo, U. Fontana, M. Carbone, R. D. Amato, and V. Ferrari, “[POSTER] hybrid video/optical see-through HMD,” in Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR-Adjunct), pp. 52-57, Nantes, France, October 2017.
21. ©Microsoft Hololens, 2017, https://www.microsoft.com/enus/hololens.
22. I. D. Learmonth, C. Young, and C. Rorabeck, “The operation of the century: total hip replacement,” The Lancet, vol. 370, no. 9597, pp. 1508-1519, 2007.
23. P. Parchi, S. Condino, M. Carbone et al., “Total hip replacement simulators with virtual planning and physical replica for surgical training and reharsal,” in Proceedings of 12th IASTED International Conference on Biomedical Engineering, BioMed 2016, pp. 97-101, Innsbruck, Austria, February 2016.
24. W. Barfield and T. Caudell, Fundamentals of Wearable Computers and Augmented Reality, Taylor and Francis, Milton Park, UK, 2001.
25. M. Carbone, S. Condino, F. Cutolo et al., “Proof of concept: wearable augmented reality video see-through display for neuro-endoscopy,” in Augmented and Virtual Reality: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, L. T. De Paolis and A. Mongelli, Eds., pp. 95-104, Springer International Publishing, New York, NY, USA, 2018.
26. J. P. Rolland and H. Fuchs, “Optical versus video see-through mead-mounted displays in medical visualization,” Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 287-309, 2000.
27. D. Nicholson, “Advances in human factors in cybersecurity,” in Proceedings of AHFE 2017 International Conference on Human Factors in Cybersecurity, Springer International Publishing, Los Angeles, CA, USA, July 2017.
28. L. Qian, A. Barthel, A. Johnson, G. Osgood, P. Kazanzides, N. Navab et al., “Comparison of optical see-through head-mounted displays for surgical interventions with object-anchored 2D-display,” International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery, vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 901-910, 2017.
29. D. M. Hoffman, A. R. Girshick, K. Akeley, and M. S. Banks, “Vergence-accommodation conflicts hinder visual performance and cause visual fatigue,” Journal of Vision, vol. 8, no. 3, p. 33, 2008.
30. G. Kramida, “Resolving the vergence-accommodation conflict in head-mounted displays,” IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, vol. 22, no. 7, pp. 1912-1931, 2016.
31. J. Kim, D. Kane, and M. S. Banks, “The rate of change of vergence-accommodation conflict affects visual discomfort,” Vision Research, vol. 105, pp. 159-165, 2014.
32. D. W. Kim, J. S. Yoo, and Y. H. Seo, “Qualitative analysis of individual and composite content factors of stereoscopic 3D video causing visual discomfort,” Displays, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 223-240, 2013.
33. V. Ferrari, C. Cappelli, G. Megali, and A. Pietrabissa, “An anatomy driven approach for generation of 3D models from multi-phase CT images,” International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 271-273, 2008.
34. P. A. Yushkevich, J. Piven, H. C. Hazlett et al., “User-guided 3D active contour segmentation of anatomical structures: significantly improved efficiency and reliability,” NeuroImage, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 1116-1128, 2006.
35. P. Cignoni, M. Callieri, M. Corsini, M. Dellepiane, F. Ganovelli, and G. Ranzuglia, “MeshLab: an open-source mesh processing tool,” in Eurographics Italian Chapter Conference, Salerno, Italy, July 2008.
36. Foundation B Blender free and open source 3D creation suite, 2017, https://www.blender.org/.
37. G. Turini, S. Condino, S. Sinceri et al., “Patient specific virtual and physical simulation platform for surgical robot mov-ability evaluation in single-access robot-assisted minimally-invasive cardiothoracic surgery,” in Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), Vol. 10325, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2017.
38. J. Grubert, Y. Itoh, K. R. Moser, and J. E. Swan II, “A survey of calibration methods for optical see-through head-mounted displays,” IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, vol. 24, no. 9, pp. 2649-2662, 2017.
39. Inc. P Vuforia SDK, 2017, https://www.vuforia.com.
40. K. S. Arun, T. S. Huang, and S. D. Blostein, “Least-squares fitting of two 3-D point sets,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 698-700, 1987.
41. S. G. Hart and L. E. Staveland, “Development of NASA-TLX (task load Index): results of empirical and theoretical research,” in Advances in Psychology, P. A. Hancock and N. Meshkati, Eds., vol. 52, pp. 139-183, 1988.
42. G. Klein, “Keynotes,” in Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR), Nantes, France, October 2017.
43. A. G. Rebecca, “How high is high? A meta-analysis of NASA-TLX global workload scores,” Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 1727-1731, 2015.
44. B. R. Wolf, X. Lu, Y. Li, J. J. Callaghan, and P. Cram, “Adverse outcomes in hip arthroplasty: long-term trends,” Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery American, vol. 94, no. 14, p. e103, 2012.
45. Y. Hasegawa and T. Amano, “Surgical skills training for primary total hip arthroplasty,” Nagoya Journal of Medical Science, vol. 77, no. 1-2, pp. 51-57, 2015.
46. R. N. de Steiger, M. Lorimer, and M. Solomon, “What is the learning curve for the anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty?,” Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, vol. 473, no. 12, pp. 3860-3866, 2015.