Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Detailed Answer
Quick Answer
Concise responses based on abstracts only
Detailed Answer
Well-researched responses based on abstracts and relevant paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 27 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 46 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 23 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 29 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 70 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 117 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 459 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 34 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

3D Augmented Reality-Assisted CT-Guided Interventions: System Design and Preclinical Trial on an Abdominal Phantom using HoloLens 2 (2005.09146v1)

Published 19 May 2020 in physics.med-ph, cs.CV, and cs.HC

Abstract: Background: Out-of-plane lesions pose challenges for CT-guided interventions. Augmented reality (AR) headset devices have evolved and are readily capable to provide virtual 3D guidance to improve CT-guided targeting. Purpose: To describe the design of a three-dimensional (3D) AR-assisted navigation system using HoloLens 2 and evaluate its performance through CT-guided simulations. Materials and Methods: A prospective trial was performed assessing CT-guided needle targeting on an abdominal phantom with and without AR guidance. A total of 8 operators with varying clinical experience were enrolled and performed a total of 86 needle passes. Procedure efficiency, radiation dose, and complication rates were compared with and without AR guidance. Vector analysis of the first needle pass was also performed. Results: Average total number of needle passes to reach the target reduced from 7.4 passes without AR to 3.4 passes with AR (54.2% decrease, p=0.011). Average dose-length product (DLP) decreased from 538 mGy-cm without AR to 318 mGy-cm with AR (41.0% decrease, p=0.009). Complication rate of hitting a non-targeted lesion decreased from 11.9% without AR (7/59 needle passes) to 0% with AR (0/27 needle passes). First needle passes were more nearly aligned with the ideal target trajectory with AR versus without AR (4.6{\deg} vs 8.0{\deg} offset, respectively, p=0.018). Medical students, residents, and attendings all performed at the same level with AR guidance. Conclusions: 3D AR guidance can provide significant improvements in procedural efficiency and radiation dose savings for targeting challenging, out-of-plane lesions. AR guidance elevated the performance of all operators to the same level irrespective of prior clinical experience.

Citations (25)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Dice Question Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Follow-Up Questions

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.