Display options
Cite
Meola A, Cutolo F, Carbone M, et al. Augmented reality in neurosurgery: a systematic review. Neurosurg Rev. 2016;40(4):537-548doi: 10.1007/s10143-016-0732-9.
Meola, A., Cutolo, F., Carbone, M., Cagnazzo, F., Ferrari, M., & Ferrari, V. (2017). Augmented reality in neurosurgery: a systematic review. Neurosurgical review, 40(4), 537-548. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-016-0732-9
Meola, Antonio, et al. "Augmented reality in neurosurgery: a systematic review." Neurosurgical review vol. 40,4 (2017): 537-548. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-016-0732-9
Meola A, Cutolo F, Carbone M, Cagnazzo F, Ferrari M, Ferrari V. Augmented reality in neurosurgery: a systematic review. Neurosurg Rev. 2017 Oct;40(4):537-548. doi: 10.1007/s10143-016-0732-9. Epub 2016 May 07. PMID: 27154018; PMCID: PMC6155988.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Neurosurg Rev. 2017 Oct;40(4):537-548. doi: 10.1007/s10143-016-0732-9. Epub 2016 May 07.

Augmented reality in neurosurgery: a systematic review.

Neurosurgical review

Antonio Meola, Fabrizio Cutolo, Marina Carbone, Federico Cagnazzo, Mauro Ferrari, Vincenzo Ferrari

Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, 02115, Boston, MA, USA. [email protected].
  2. Department of Translational Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, EndoCAS Center, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
  3. Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
  4. Department of Vascular Surgery, Pisa University Medical School, Pisa, Italy.
  5. Department of Information Engineering, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.

PMID: 27154018 PMCID: PMC6155988 DOI: 10.1007/s10143-016-0732-9

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: Aneurysm; Arterovenous malformation; Augmented reality; Cavernous malformation; Navigation; Tumor; Virtual reality

References

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

MeSH terms

Publication Types

Grant support