Augmented reality in neurosurgery: a systematic review.

Antonio Meola, Fabrizio Cutolo, Marina Carbone, Federico Cagnazzo, Mauro Ferrari, Vincenzo Ferrari
Author Information
  1. Antonio Meola: Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, 02115, Boston, MA, USA. ameola@partners.org.
  2. Fabrizio Cutolo: Department of Translational Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, EndoCAS Center, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
  3. Marina Carbone: Department of Translational Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, EndoCAS Center, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
  4. Federico Cagnazzo: Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
  5. Mauro Ferrari: Department of Translational Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, EndoCAS Center, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
  6. Vincenzo Ferrari: Department of Translational Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, EndoCAS Center, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.

Abstract

Neuronavigation has become an essential neurosurgical tool in pursuing minimal invasiveness and maximal safety, even though it has several technical limitations. Augmented reality (AR) neuronavigation is a significant advance, providing a real-time updated 3D virtual model of anatomical details, overlaid on the real surgical field. Currently, only a few AR systems have been tested in a clinical setting. The aim is to review such devices. We performed a PubMed search of reports restricted to human studies of in vivo applications of AR in any neurosurgical procedure using the search terms "Augmented reality" and "Neurosurgery." Eligibility assessment was performed independently by two reviewers in an unblinded standardized manner. The systems were qualitatively evaluated on the basis of the following: neurosurgical subspecialty of application, pathology of treated lesions and lesion locations, real data source, virtual data source, tracking modality, registration technique, visualization processing, display type, and perception location. Eighteen studies were included during the period 1996 to September 30, 2015. The AR systems were grouped by the real data source: microscope (8), hand- or head-held cameras (4), direct patient view (2), endoscope (1), and X-ray fluoroscopy (1) head-mounted display (1). A total of 195 lesions were treated: 75 (38.46 %) were neoplastic, 77 (39.48 %) neurovascular, and 1 (0.51 %) hydrocephalus, and 42 (21.53 %) were undetermined. Current literature confirms that AR is a reliable and versatile tool when performing minimally invasive approaches in a wide range of neurosurgical diseases, although prospective randomized studies are not yet available and technical improvements are needed.

Keywords

References

  1. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph. 2012 Feb;18(2):332-52 [PMID: 21383411]
  2. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2013 May;155(5):943-7 [PMID: 23494133]
  3. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2014 Sep;156(9):1769-74 [PMID: 25037466]
  4. Neurosurgery. 2007 Apr;60(4 Suppl 2):366-71; discussion 371-2 [PMID: 17415176]
  5. Stud Health Technol Inform. 1996;29:1-11 [PMID: 10163741]
  6. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg. 1997;68(1-4 Pt 1):18-24 [PMID: 9711690]
  7. J Neurosurg. 2015 Jul;123(1):206-11 [PMID: 25748303]
  8. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg. 1999;72(2-4):107-11 [PMID: 10853060]
  9. BMJ. 2009 Jul 21;339:b2700 [PMID: 19622552]
  10. Br J Neurosurg. 2010 Feb;24(1):69-74 [PMID: 20158356]
  11. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2014 Dec;42(8):1970-6 [PMID: 25441867]
  12. J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg. 2013 Mar;74(2):71-6 [PMID: 23404553]
  13. Neurosurgery. 2014 Jun;10 Suppl 2:252-60; discussion 260-1 [PMID: 24594927]
  14. World Neurosurg. 2015 Apr;83(4):596-602 [PMID: 25527874]
  15. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2015;2015:4210-3 [PMID: 26737223]
  16. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph. 2014 Mar;20(3):391-403 [PMID: 24434220]
  17. Minim Invasive Neurosurg. 2009 Feb;52(1):9-16 [PMID: 19247899]
  18. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2014 Apr;61(4):1295-304 [PMID: 24658253]
  19. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg. 2014;92(1):17-24 [PMID: 24216673]
  20. Neurosurgery. 2009 Oct;65(4):795-807; discussion 807-8 [PMID: 19834386]
  21. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2005 Nov;24(11):1500-11 [PMID: 16279086]
  22. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2009 Nov;56(11):2627-33 [PMID: 19651551]
  23. Comput Med Imaging Graph. 2013 Mar;37(2):98-112 [PMID: 23490236]
  24. Neurosurgery. 2002 Jun;50(6):1393-7 [PMID: 12015864]
  25. Comput Aided Surg. 1998;3(5):239-47 [PMID: 10207648]
  26. Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown). 2015 Dec 1;11(4):504-511 [PMID: 29506163]

Grants

  1. R25 CA089017/NCI NIH HHS
  2. R25CA089017/National Institutes of Health

MeSH Term

Humans
Neuronavigation
Surgery, Computer-Assisted

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0ARneurosurgicalreality1AugmentedrealsystemsstudiesdatatooltechnicalvirtualreviewperformedsearchlesionssourcedisplaymalformationNeuronavigationbecomeessentialpursuingminimalinvasivenessmaximalsafetyeventhoughseverallimitationsneuronavigationsignificantadvanceprovidingreal-timeupdated3DmodelanatomicaldetailsoverlaidsurgicalfieldCurrentlytestedclinicalsettingaimdevicesPubMedreportsrestrictedhumanvivoapplicationsprocedureusingterms"Augmentedreality""Neurosurgery"Eligibilityassessmentindependentlytworeviewersunblindedstandardizedmannerqualitativelyevaluatedbasisfollowing:subspecialtyapplicationpathologytreatedlesionlocationstrackingmodalityregistrationtechniquevisualizationprocessingtypeperceptionlocationEighteenincludedperiod1996September302015groupedsource:microscope8hand-head-heldcameras4directpatientview2endoscopeX-rayfluoroscopyhead-mountedtotal195treated:753846 %neoplastic773948 %neurovascular051 %hydrocephalus422153 %undeterminedCurrentliteratureconfirmsreliableversatileperformingminimallyinvasiveapproacheswiderangediseasesalthoughprospectiverandomizedyetavailableimprovementsneededneurosurgery:systematicAneurysmArterovenousCavernousNavigationTumorVirtual

Similar Articles

Cited By