The role of hand motion connectivity in the performance of laparoscopic procedures on a virtual reality simulator

Constantinos Loukas; Constantinos Rouseas; Evangelos Georgiou

doi:10.1007/s11517-013-1063-4

Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing

August 2013, Volume 51, Issue 8, pp 911–922 | Cite as

The role of hand motion connectivity in the performance of laparoscopic procedures on a virtual reality simulator

Authors
Authors and affiliations

Constantinos LoukasEmail author
Constantinos Rouseas
Evangelos Georgiou

Original Article

First Online: 30 March 2013

Received: 05 December 2012

Accepted: 12 March 2013

262 Downloads
5 Citations

Abstract

Assessment of surgical skills based on virtual reality (VR) technology has received major attention in recent years, with special focus placed on experience discrimination via hand motion analysis. Although successful, this approach is restricted from extracting additional important information about the trainee’s hand kinematics. In this study, we investigate the role of hand motion connectivity in the performance of a laparoscopic cholecystectomy on a VR simulator. Two groups were considered: experienced residents and beginners. The connectivity pattern of each subject was evaluated by analyzing their hand motion signals with multivariate autoregressive (MAR) models. Our analysis included the entire as well as key phases of the operation. The results revealed that experienced residents outperformed beginners in terms of the number, magnitude and covariation of the MAR weights. The magnitude of the coherence spectra between different combinations of hand signals was in favor of the experienced group. Yet, the more challenging (in terms of hand movement activity) an operational phase was, the more connections were generated, with experienced subjects performing more coordinated gestures per phase. The proposed approach provides a suitable basis for hand motion analysis of surgical trainees and could be utilized in future VR simulators for skill assessment.

Keywords

Laparoscopic surgery Multivariate autoregressive models (MAR) Surgical performance analysis Virtual reality simulator Hand motion connectivity

This is a preview of subscription content, to check access.

Appendix

The posterior distribution for the MAR coefficients structured in a vectorized form is $p({\mathbf{w}}/{\mathbf{O}}) = N({\mathbf{w}}/\overline{\mathbf{w}} ,\overline{\varvec{\Upsigma}})$ with

$$\overline{{\varvec{\Upsigma}}} = \left( {\overline{{\varvec{\Uplambda}}} \otimes {\mathbf{X}}^{\text{T}} {\mathbf{X}} + \overline{\lambda } {\mathbf{I}}_{{n}} } \right)^{ - 1} $$

(18)

$$\overline{{\mathbf{w}}} = \overline{{\varvec{\Upsigma}}} \left( {\overline{\Uplambda } \otimes {\mathbf{X}}^{\text{T}} {\mathbf{X}}} \right){\mathbf{w}}_{\text{ML}} $$

(19)

Where ⊗ is the Kronecker product and w _ML is the vec() form of the ML solution for the weights given by Eq. (6).

The distribution for the precision on the MAR coefficients is $p({\lambda \mathord{\left/ {\vphantom {\lambda \varvec{O}}} \right. \kern-0pt} \varvec{O}}) = {\text{Gam}}\left( {{\lambda \mathord{\left/ {\vphantom {\lambda {b\prime ,}}} \right. \kern-0pt} {b^{\prime} ,}}c^{\prime} } \right)$ with

$$\frac{1}{b^{\prime} } = 0.5(\overline{{\mathbf{w}}} )^{\rm T} \overline{{\mathbf{w}}} + 0.5{\text{tr}}(\overline{{\varvec{\Upsigma}}} ) + b^{ - 1} $$

(20)

$$c^{\prime} = 0.5n + c $$

(21)

$$\overline{\lambda } = b^{\prime} c^{\prime} $$

(22)

The parameters of Gam are selected so that it is sufficiently uninformative (b = 1,000 and c = 0.001).

The noise precision posterior is a Wishart distribution p(Λ|O) = W _d(Λ |s, S) where

$${\mathbf{S}} = ({\mathbf{Y}} - {\mathbf{X}}\overline{{\mathbf{A}}} )^{\rm T} ({\mathbf{Y}} - {\mathbf{X}}\overline{{\mathbf{A}}} ) + {\varvec{\Upomega}} $$

(23)

$$s = N $$

(24)

$$\overline{{\varvec{\Uplambda}}} = s{\mathbf{S}}^{ - 1} $$

(25)

$${\varvec{\Upomega}} = \Upsigma_{t} \left( {{\mathbf{I}}_{\text {d}} \otimes {\mathbf{x}}_{t} } \right)\overline{{\varvec{\Upsigma}}} \left( {{\mathbf{I}}_{\text {d}} \otimes {\mathbf{x}}_{t} } \right)^{\rm T} $$

(26)

The Gamma and Wishart distributions are given in the Appendix of [18].

The updates are initialized using the maximum likelihood estimates [see Eqs. (6)–(8)]. The Bayesian evidence is computed as:

$$E(r) = - \frac{N}{2}{\text{ln}}|{\mathbf{S}}| - {\text{KL}}\left( {q({{\mathbf{w}} \mathord{\left/ {\vphantom {\varvec{w}}{\mathbf{O}}} \right. \kern-0pt}}),p({{\mathbf{w}} \mathord{\left/ {\vphantom {{\mathbf{w}} \lambda }} \right. \kern-0pt} \lambda })} \right) - {\text{KL}}\left( {q(\lambda ,{\mathbf{O}})} \right) + {\text{const}} $$

(27)

where KL(p, q) denotes the Kullback-Liebler (KL) divergence between the distributions p and q. Iteration terminates when the Bayesian evidence increases by less than a predetermined threshold.

References

1.
Aggarwal R, Dosis A, Bello F, Darzi A (2007) Motion tracking systems for assessment of surgical skill. Surg Endosc 21:339PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.
Darzi A, Smith S, Taffinder N (1999) Assessing operative skill. Needs to become more objective. BMJ 318:887–888PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.
Dosis A, Aggarwal R, Bello F, Moorthy K, Munz Y, Gillies D, Darzi A (2005) Synchronized video and motion analysis for the assessment of procedures in the operating theater. Arch Surg 140:293–299PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.
Gallagher AG, Richie K, McClure N, McGuigan J (2001) Objective psychomotor skills assessment of experienced, junior, and novice laparoscopists with virtual reality. World J Surg 25:1478–1483PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.
Gallagher AG, Ritter EM, Lederman AB, McClusky DA 3rd, Smith CD (2005) Video-assisted surgery represents more than a loss of three-dimensional vision. Am J Surg 189:76–80PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.
Harrison L, Penny WD, Friston K (2003) Multivariate autoregressive modeling of fMRI time series. Neuroimage 19:1477–1491PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.
Kahol K, Krishnan NC, Balasubramanian VN, Panchanathan S, Smith M, Ferrara J (2006) Measuring movement expertise in surgical tasks. In: Nahrstedt K, Matthew T, Yong R, Wolfgang K, Ketan M-P (eds) Proceedings of the 14th annual ACM international conference on multimedia, Santa Barbara, CA, USA, Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) Press, 2006, New York, pp 719–722Google Scholar
8.
Leong JJ, Nicolaou M, Atallah L, Mylonas GP, Darzi AW, Yang GZ (2007) HMM assessment of quality of movement trajectory in laparoscopic surgery. Comput Aided Surg 12:335–346PubMedGoogle Scholar
9.
Litynski GS (1999) Profiles in laparoscopy: Mouret, Dubois, and Perissat: the laparoscopic breakthrough in Europe (1987–1988). JSLS 3:163–167PubMedGoogle Scholar
10.
Loukas C, Georgiou E (2011) Multivariate autoregressive modeling of hand kinematics for laparoscopic skills assessment of surgical trainees. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 58:3289–3297PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.
Loukas C, Georgiou E ((in press)) Surgical workflow analysis with Gaussian mixture multivariate autoregressive (GMMAR) models: a simulation study. Computer Aided SurgeryGoogle Scholar
12.
Loukas C, Nikiteas N, Kanakis M, Georgiou E (2011) Deconstructing laparoscopic competence in a virtual reality simulation environment. Surgery 149:750–760PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.
MacFadyen BV, Arregui ME, Olsen DO, Soper NJ, Wexner SD, Eubanks S, Peters JH, Swanstrom LL (2004) Laparoscopic surgery of the abdomen. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.
McBeth PB, Hodgson AJ, Nagy AG, Qayumi K (2002) Quantitative methodology of evaluating surgeon performance in laparoscopic surgery. Stud Health Technol Inform 85:280–286PubMedGoogle Scholar
15.
Megali G, Sinigaglia S, Tonet O, Dario P (2006) Modelling and evaluation of surgical performance using hidden Markov models. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 53:1911–1919PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.
Noar MD (1991) Endoscopy simulation: a brave new world? Endoscopy 23:147–149PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.
Padoy N, Blum T, Feussner H, Berger M-O, Navab N (2008) On-line recognition of surgical activity for monitoring in the operating room. In: Goker MH (ed) Proceedings of the 20th Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence, Palo Alto, CA, USA, Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) 2008 Press, Chicago, pp 1718–1724Google Scholar
18.
Penny WD, Roberts SJ (2002) Bayesian multivariate autoregressive models with structured priors. IEE Proc Vision Image Signal Process 149:33–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.
Priestley MB (1981) Spectral analysis and time series. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
20.
Rabiner LR (1989) A tutorial on Hidden Markov Models and selected applications in speech recognition. Proc IEEE 77:257–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21.
Reiley CE, Lin HC, Varadarajan B, Vagvolgyi B, Khudanpur S, Yuh DD, Hager GD (2008) Automatic recognition of surgical motions using statistical modeling for capturing variability. Stud Health Technol Inform 132:396–401PubMedGoogle Scholar
22.
Rosen J, Solazzo M, Hannaford B, Sinanan M (2001) Objective laparoscopic skills assessments of surgical residents using Hidden Markov Models based on haptic information and tool/tissue interactions. Stud Health Technol Inform 81:417–423PubMedGoogle Scholar
23.
Rosen J, Brown JD, Chang L, Sinanan MN, Hannaford B (2006) Generalized approach for modeling minimally invasive surgery as a stochastic process using a discrete Markov model. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 53:399–413PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
24.
Sutton C, McCloy R, Middlebrook A, Chater P, Wilson M, Stone R (1997) MIST VR. A laparoscopic surgery procedures trainer and evaluator. Stud Health Technol Inform 39:598–607PubMedGoogle Scholar
25.
Tang B, Hanna GB, Joice P, Cuschieri A (2004) Identification and categorization of technical errors by observational clinical human reliability assessment (OCHRA) during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Arch Surg 139:1215–1220PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
26.
Weisberg (2005) Applied linear regression. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

Authors and Affiliations

Constantinos Loukas
- 1
Email author
Constantinos Rouseas
- 1
Evangelos Georgiou
- 1

1.Medical Physics Lab-Simulation Center, School of MedicineUniversity of AthensAthensGreece

The role of hand motion connectivity in the performance of laparoscopic procedures on a virtual reality simulator

Abstract

Keywords

References

Copyright information

Authors and Affiliations

Personalised recommendations

Cite article