Schneider, C;
Thompson, S;
Totz, J;
Song, Y;
Allam, M;
Sodergren, MH;
Desjardins, AE;
... Davidson, BR; + view all
(2020)
Comparison of manual and semi-automatic registration in augmented reality image-guided liver surgery: a clinical feasibility study.
Surgical Endoscopy
10.1007/s00464-020-07807-x.
(In press).
Preview |
Text
Schneider2020_Article_ComparisonOfManualAndSemi-auto.pdf - Published Version Download (1MB) | Preview |
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The laparoscopic approach to liver resection may reduce morbidity and hospital stay. However, uptake has been slow due to concerns about patient safety and oncological radicality. Image guidance systems may improve patient safety by enabling 3D visualisation of critical intra- and extrahepatic structures. Current systems suffer from non-intuitive visualisation and a complicated setup process. A novel image guidance system (SmartLiver), offering augmented reality visualisation and semi-automatic registration has been developed to address these issues. A clinical feasibility study evaluated the performance and usability of SmartLiver with either manual or semi-automatic registration. METHODS: Intraoperative image guidance data were recorded and analysed in patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection or cancer staging. Stereoscopic surface reconstruction and iterative closest point matching facilitated semi-automatic registration. The primary endpoint was defined as successful registration as determined by the operating surgeon. Secondary endpoints were system usability as assessed by a surgeon questionnaire and comparison of manual vs. semi-automatic registration accuracy. Since SmartLiver is still in development no attempt was made to evaluate its impact on perioperative outcomes. RESULTS: The primary endpoint was achieved in 16 out of 18 patients. Initially semi-automatic registration failed because the IGS could not distinguish the liver surface from surrounding structures. Implementation of a deep learning algorithm enabled the IGS to overcome this issue and facilitate semi-automatic registration. Mean registration accuracy was 10.9 ± 4.2 mm (manual) vs. 13.9 ± 4.4 mm (semi-automatic) (Mean difference - 3 mm; p = 0.158). Surgeon feedback was positive about IGS handling and improved intraoperative orientation but also highlighted the need for a simpler setup process and better integration with laparoscopic ultrasound. CONCLUSION: The technical feasibility of using SmartLiver intraoperatively has been demonstrated. With further improvements semi-automatic registration may enhance user friendliness and workflow of SmartLiver. Manual and semi-automatic registration accuracy were comparable but evaluation on a larger patient cohort is required to confirm these findings.
| Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Title: | Comparison of manual and semi-automatic registration in augmented reality image-guided liver surgery: a clinical feasibility study |
| Location: | Germany |
| Open access status: | An open access version is available from UCL Discovery |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s00464-020-07807-x |
| Publisher version: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-020-07807-x |
| Language: | English |
| Additional information: | Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
| Keywords: | Augmented reality, Computer-assisted surgery, Image-guided surgery, Laparoscopic liver surgery, Semi-automatic registration, Stereoscopic surface reconstruction |
| UCL classification: | UCL UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Medical Sciences UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Medical Sciences > Div of Surgery and Interventional Sci UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Medical Sciences > Div of Surgery and Interventional Sci > Department of Surgical Biotechnology UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > UCL BEAMS UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > UCL BEAMS > Faculty of Engineering Science UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > UCL BEAMS > Faculty of Engineering Science > Dept of Computer Science UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > UCL BEAMS > Faculty of Engineering Science > Dept of Med Phys and Biomedical Eng |
| URI: | https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10107975 |
Archive Staff Only
 |
View Item |
