Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Application and Prospect of Mixed Reality Technology in Medical Field

  • Published:
Current Medical Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Mixed reality (MR) technology is a new digital holographic image technology, which appears in the field of graphics after virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) technology, a new interdisciplinary frontier. As a new generation of technology, MR has attracted great attention of clinicians in recent years. The emergence of MR will bring about revolutionary changes in medical education training, medical research, medical communication, and clinical treatment. At present, MR technology has become the popular frontline information technology for medical applications. With the popularization of digital technology in the medical field, the development prospects of MR are inestimable. The purpose of this review article is to introduce the application of MR technology in the medical field and prospect its trend in the future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Xiao 2R, Xiong G. Computer-assisted Surgery for Scaphoid Fracture. Curr Med Sci, 2018,38(6):941–948

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Tepper OM, Rudy HL, Lefkowitz A, et al. Mixed Reality with HoloLens: Where Virtual Reality Meets Augmented Reality in the Operating Room. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2017,140(5):1066–1070

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. de Ribaupierre S, Eagleson R. Editorial: Challenges for the usability of AR and VR for clinical neurosurgical procedures. Healthc Technol Lett, 2017,4(5):151

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Fertleman C, Aubugeau-Williams P, Sher C, et al. A Discussion of Virtual Reality As a New Tool for Training Healthcare Professionals. Front Public Health, 2018,6:44

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Hamacher A, Kim SJ, Cho ST, et al. Application of Virtual, Augmented, and Mixed Reality to Urology. Int Neurourol J, 2016,20(3):172–181

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Barsom EZ, Graafland M, Schijven MP. Systematic review on the effectiveness of augmented reality applications in medical training. Surg Endosc, 2016,30(10):4174–4183

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Nicola S, Stoicu-Tivadar L. Mixed Reality Supporting Modern Medical Education. Stud Health Technol Inform, 2018,255 242–255 246

    Google Scholar 

  8. Eck U, Winkler A. Display technologies for augmented reality in medical applications. Unfallchirurg, 2018, 121(4):278–285

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bova FJ, Rajon DA, Friedman WA, et al. Mixed-reality simulation for neurosurgical procedures. Neurosurgery, 2013,73(Suppl 1):138–145

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sappenfield JW, Smith WB, Cooper LA, et al. Visualization Improves Supraclavicular Access to the Subclavian Vein in a Mixed Reality Simulator. Anesth Analg, 2018,127(1):83–89

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Halic T, Kockara S, Bayrak C, et al. Mixed reality simulation of rasping procedure in artificial cervical disc replacement (ACDR) surgery. BMC Bioinformatics, 2010,11 (Suppl 6):S11

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Hooten KG, Lister JR, Lombard G, et al. Mixed reality ventriculostomy simulation: experience in neurosurgical residency. Neurosurgery, 2014,10 Suppl 4: 576–581

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Robinson AR 3rd, Gravenstein N, Cooper LA, et al. A mixed-reality part-task trainer for subclavian venous access. Simul Healthc, 2014,9(1):56–64

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kotranza A, Lind DS, Lok B. Real-time evaluation and visualization of learner performance in a mixed-reality environment for clinical breast examination. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph, 2012,18(7):1101–1114

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Shen Y, Hananel D, Zhao Z, et al. A New Design for Airway Management Training with Mixed Reality and High Fidelity Modeling. Stud Health Technol Inform, 2016,220:359–362

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Stefan P, Pfandler M, Wucherer P, et al. Team training and assessment in mixed reality-based simulated operating room: Current state of research in the field of simulation in spine surgery exemplified by the ATMEOS project. Unfallchirurg, 2018,121(4):271–277

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lu K, Marino NE, Russell D, et al. Use of Short Message Service and Smartphone Applications in the Management of Surgical Patients: A Systematic Review. Telemed J E Health, 2018,24(6):406–414

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Rhee T, Petikam L, Allen B, et al. MR360: Mixed Reality Rendering for 360 degrees Panoramic Videos. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph, 2017,23(4):1379–1388

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Wu X, Liu R, Yu J, et al. Mixed Reality Technology Launches in Orthopedic Surgery for Comprehensive Preoperative Management of Complicated Cervical Fractures. Surg Innov, 2018,25(4):421–422

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Heuts S, Sardari Nia P, Maessen JG. Preoperative planning of thoracic surgery with use of threedimensional reconstruction, rapid prototyping, simulation and virtual navigation. J Vis Surg, 2016,2:77

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Wu X, Liu R, Yu J, et al. Mixed Reality Technology-Assisted Orthopedics Surgery Navigation. Surg Innov, 2018,25(3):304–305

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Sauer IM, Queisner M, Tang P, et al. Mixed Reality in Visceral Surgery: Development of a Suitable Workflow and Evaluation of Intraoperative Use-cases. Ann Surg, 2017,266(5):706–712

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mert A, Kiesel B, Wohrer A, et al. Introduction of a standardized multimodality image protocol for navigation-guided surgery of suspected low-grade gliomas. Neurosurg Focus, 2015,38(1):E4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Linte CA, Davenport KP, Cleary K, et al. On mixed reality environments for minimally invasive therapy guidance: systems architecture, successes and challenges in their implementation from laboratory to clinic. Comput Med Imaging Graph, 2013,37(2):83–97

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Lee SC, Fuerst B, Tateno K, et al. Multi-modal imaging, model-based tracking, and mixed reality visualisation for orthopaedic surgery. Healthc Technol Lett, 2017,4(5):168–173

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Fischer M, Fuerst B, Lee SC, et al. Preclinical usability study of multiple augmented reality concepts for K-wire placement. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg, 2016,11(6):1007–1014

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Incekara F, Smits M, Dirven C, et al. Clinical Feasibility of a Wearable Mixed-Reality Device in Neurosurgery. World Neurosurg, 2018,118:e422–e427

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Wang S, Parsons M, Stone-McLean J, et al. Augmented Reality as a Telemedicine Platform for Remote Procedural Training. Sensors (Basel), 2017,17(10): pii: E2294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Yetisen AK, Martinez-Hurtado JL, Unal B, et al. Wearables in Medicine. Adv Mater, 2018:e1706910

    Google Scholar 

  30. Appelbaum L, Mahgerefteh SY, Sosna J, et al. Imageguided fusion and navigation: applications in tumor ablation. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol, 2013,16(4):287–295

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Yoshino M, Saito T, Kin T, et al. A Microscopic Optically Tracking Navigation System That Uses Highresolution 3D Computer Graphics. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo), 2015,55(8):674–679

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Beal MD, Delagramaticas D, Fitz D. Improving outcomes in total knee arthroplasty-do navigation or customized implants have a role? J Orthop Surg Res, 2016,11(1):60

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Zhang W, Takigawa T, Wu Y, et al. Accuracy of pedicle screw insertion in posterior scoliosis surgery: a comparison between intraoperative navigation and preoperative navigation techniques. Eur Spine J, 2017,26(6):1756–1764

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Li L, Yang J, Chu Y, et al. A Novel Augmented Reality Navigation System for Endoscopic Sinus and Skull Base Surgery: A Feasibility Study. PLoS One, 2016,11(1):e0146996

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Brigham TJ. Reality Check: Basics of Augmented, Virtual, and Mixed Reality. Med Ref Serv Q, 2017,36(2):171–178

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Hanna MG, Ahmed I, Nine J, et al. Augmented Reality Technology Using Microsoft HoloLens in Anatomic Pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med, 2018,142(5):638–644

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Chen AD, Lin SJ. Discussion: Mixed Reality with HoloLens: Where Virtual Reality Meets Augmented Reality in the Operating Room. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2017,140(5):1071–1072

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Valdes Olmos RA, Vidal-Sicart S, Giammarile F, et al. The GOSTT concept and hybrid mixed/virtual/ augmented reality environment radioguided surgery. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2014,58(2):207–215

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Lee C, Rincon GA, Meyer G, et al. The effects of visual realism on search tasks in mixed reality simulation. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph, 2013,19(4):547–556

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Ferrari V, Megali G, Troia E, et al. A 3-D mixed-reality system for stereoscopic visualization of medical dataset. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng, 2009,56(11):2627–2633

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Martelli N, Serrano C, van den Brink H, et al. Advantages and disadvantages of 3-dimensional printing in surgery: A systematic review. Surgery, 2016,159(6):1485–1500

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. The authors contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedics, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430022, China

    Hong-zhi Hu, Xiao-bo Feng, Zeng-wu Shao, Mao Xie, Song Xu, Xing-huo Wu & Zhe-wei Ye

Authors
  1. Hong-zhi Hu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xiao-bo Feng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zeng-wu Shao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mao Xie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Song Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Xing-huo Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Zhe-wei Ye
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zhe-wei Ye.

Additional information

This study was supported by the Major Project of Technological Innovation of Hubei Province (No. CXZD20180000S3) and the Science and Technology Project from the Ministry of Personnel and Social Affairs for Excellent Returned Students (No. 2016-176).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hu, Hz., Feng, Xb., Shao, Zw. et al. Application and Prospect of Mixed Reality Technology in Medical Field. CURR MED SCI 39, 1–6 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11596-019-1992-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11596-019-1992-8

Key words

Search

Navigation