Background-incorporated volumetric model for patient-specific surgical simulation: a segmentation-free, modeling-free framework

  • Kei Wai Cecilia Hung
  • Megumi Nakao
  • Koji Yoshimura
  • Kotaro Minato
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

Patient-specific surgical simulation imposes both practical and technical challenges. We propose a segmentation-free, modeling-free framework that creates medical volumetric models for intuitive volume deformation and manipulation in patient-specific surgical simulation.

Methods

The proposed framework creates a volumetric model based upon a new form of mesh structure, a Volume Proxy Mesh (VPM). The model can be generated in two phases: the vertex placement phase and mesh improvement phase. Vertices of a VPM are assigned to an initial location by curvature-based vertex placement method, and followed by mesh improvement performed by Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO).

Results

The framework is applied to several kidney CT volume data. Using the framework, the resulting models are closely tailored to the detailed features of the datasets. Moreover, the resulting VPM meshes can support broader spectrum deformation between the manipulated organ and its surrounding tissues. Progress in the mesh quality of the final mesh also shows that PSO is feasible for mesh improvement.

Conclusion

The framework was applied to several kidney CT volume datasets. Using the framework, the resulting models are closely tailored to the detailed features of the datasets. Moreover, the resulting VPM meshes can support broader spectrum deformation between the manipulated organ and its surrounding tissues. Evaluation of final mesh quality shows that PSO is feasible for mesh improvement.

Keywords

Patient-specific surgical simulation Direct volume manipulation Volumetric models Segmentation-free Curvature Tetrahedral mesh improvement 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Soler L, Marescaux J (2008) Patient-specific surgical simulation. World J Surg 32: 208–212CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wittek A, Miller K, Kikinis R, Warfield S (2007) Patient-specific model of brain deformation: application to medical image registration. J Biomech 40(4): 919–929CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bao C, Wang BL (2008) A open source based general framework for virtual surgery simulation. In: Proceedings of international conference on biomedical engineering and informatics, pp 575–579Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bro-Nielsen M, Cotin S (1996) Real-time volumetric deformable models for surgery simulation using finite elements and condensation. Comput Graph Forum 15(3): C-57–C-66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fong P (2009) Sensing, acquisition, and interactive playback of data-based models for elastic deformable objects. Int J Robot Res 28(5): 630–655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Plass A, Scheffel H, Alkadhi H, Kaufmann P, Genoni M, Volkmar F, Gruenfelder J (2009) Aortic valve replacement through a minimally invasive approach: preoperative planning, surgical technique, and outcome. Ann Thorac Surg 88(6): 1851–1856CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Satava RM (2008) Historical review of surgical simulation—a personal perspective. World J Surg 32(2): 141–148CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chui CK, Wang ZL, Zhang J, Ong JS-K, Bian L, Teo JC-M, Yan CH, Ong SH, Wang SC, Wonge HK, Teoh SH (2009) A component-oriented software toolkit for patient-specific finite element model generation. Adv Eng Softw 40: 184–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cover S, Ezquerra N, O’Brien J (1993) Interactively deformable models for surgery simulation. IEEE Comput Graph Appl 13(6): 68–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ferrari V, Tuytelaars T, Gool G (2006) Simultaneous object recognition and segmentation from single or multiple model views. Int J Comput Vis 67(2): 159–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liu Q, Prakash E, Srinivasan M (2007) Interactive deformable geometry maps: Efficient modeling for interactive deformation of non-rigid 3D objects. Vis Comput 23(2): 119–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sutherland L, Middleton P, Anthony A, Hamdorf J, Cregan P, Scott D, Maddern G (2006) Surgical simulation: a systematic review. Ann Surg 243(3): 291–300CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gibson S, Fyock C, Grimson E, Kanade T, Kikinis R, Lauer H, McKenzie N, Mor A, Nakajima S, Ohkami H, Osborne R, Samosky J, Sawada A (1998) Volumetric object modeling for surgical simulation. Med Image Anal 2(2): 121–132CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Haluck R, Marshall R, Krummel T, Melkonian M (2001) Are surgery training programs ready for virtual reality? A survey of program directors in general surgery. Virtual Real Surg Train Programs 193(6): 660–665Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nakao M, Hung KWC, Yano S, Yoshimura Y, Minato K (2009) Adaptive proxy geometry for direct volume manipulation. IEEE Pacific VIS (to appear)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hung KWC, Nakao M (2009) Automated volume sampling optimization for direct volume deformation in patient-specific surgical simulation. In: IEEE international symposium on biomedical imaging: from nano to macro, pp 1051–1054Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kneebone R (2003) Simulation in surgical training: educational issues and practical implications. Med Educ 37: 267–277CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Meyer M, Kirby RM, Whitaker R (2007) Topology, accuracy, and quality of isosurface meshes using dynamic particles. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph 13(6): 1704–1711CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kennedy J, Eberhart RC (1995) Particle swarm optimization. In: IEEE international conference on neural networks, pp 1942–1948Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Eberhart RC, Shi Y (1998) Evolving artificial neural networks. In: Proceedings of 1998 international congress on neural networks and brain, pp PL5–PL13Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yilmaz A, Kuzuoglu M (2009) A particle swarm optimization approach for hexahedral mesh smoothing. Int J Numer Methods Fluids 60(1): 55–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Trelea IC (2002) The particle swarm optimization algorithm: convergence analysis and parameter selection. Inf Process Lett 85(6): 317–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© CARS 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kei Wai Cecilia Hung
    • 1
  • Megumi Nakao
    • 1
  • Koji Yoshimura
    • 2
  • Kotaro Minato
    • 1
  1. 1.Graduate School of Information ScienceNara Institute of Science and TechnologyNaraJapan
  2. 2.Department of UrologyKyoto University HospitalKyotoJapan

Personalised recommendations