Towards the Development of a Virtual Reality Simulator with Haptic Force Feedback for Training in Stereotactic Brain Biopsies

  • Laura Pérez-PachónEmail author
  • Matthieu Poyade
  • Jennifer Brown
  • Val Fallon


Neurosurgery training traditionally follows the apprenticeship model of learning using supervised ‘hands-on’ skill acquisition in the operating theatre. With technological advancements in computer-generated images and interactive technologies, haptic-based virtual reality simulators have been shown to provide successful workbenches for realistic training in surgical procedures. The use of haptic force feedback in virtual reality simulates the tactile properties of tissues and surgical instrumentation manipulation, which increases the degree of realism for the ‘operating surgeon’ and enables the acquisition of surgical skills in a safe virtual learning environment. A pilot study was conducted whereby anatomical structures were modelled from medical datasets using segmentation algorithms and modelling platforms and applied as three-dimensional content to a haptic-based virtual learning environment of a stereotactic brain biopsy procedure. This has seen the creation of a prototype haptic-based virtual reality simulator which, with further development, may complement traditional neurosurgery training in stereotactic brain biopsies.


Haptics Surgical simulation Neurosurgery Stereotactic biopsy Force feedback Surgical training Virtual reality 


  1. Aggarwal, R., Tully, A., Grantcharov, T., et al.: VR simulation training can improve technical skills during laparoscopic salpingectomy for ectopic pregnancy. BJOG. 113(2), 1382–1387 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aggarwal, R., Crochet, P., Dias, A., et al.: Development of a VR training curriculum for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br. J. Surg. 96(9), 1086–1093 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Autodesk: 3D design, engineering and entertainment software. (2016). Accessed 10 Feb 2016
  4. Bajka, M., Tuchschmid, S., Streich, M., et al.: Evaluation of a new virtual-reality training simulator for hysteroscopy. Surg. Endosc. 23(9), 2026–2033 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bhade, M.A., Shah, B., Dave, C.R., et al.: Anaesthetic aspects of stereotactic brain biopsy. IJA. 46(2), 111–114 (2002)Google Scholar
  6. BodyParts3D: The database center for life science. Licenced under CC Attribution-Share Alike 2.1 Japan. (2015). Accessed 20 May 2015
  7. Burger, P.C., Nelson, J.S.: Stereotactic brain biopsies. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 121(5), 477 (1997)Google Scholar
  8. Chamarra, M.K., Dankelman, J., van den Dobbelsteen, J.J., et al.: Force feedback and basic laparoscopic skills. Surg. Endosc. 22(10), 2140–2148 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cohen, A.R., Lohani, S., Manjila, S., et al.: Virtual reality simulation: basic concepts and use in endoscopic neurosurgery training. Childs Nerv. Syst. 29(8), 1235–1244 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Delorme, S., Laroche, D., DiRaddo, R., et al.: NeuroTouch: a physics-based virtual simulator for cranial microneurosurgery training. Neurosurgery. 71, 32–42 (2012)Google Scholar
  11. Farnworth, L.R., Lemay, D.E., Wooldridge, T., et al.: A comparison of operative times in arthroscopic ACL reconstruction between orthopaedic faculty and residents: the financial impact of orthopaedic surgical training in the operating room. Iowa Orthop. J. 21, 31–35 (2001)Google Scholar
  12. FEI: High-performance microscopy workflow solutions. (2016). Accessed 10 Feb 2016
  13. Fried, M.P., Satava, R., Weghorst, S., et al.: The use of surgical simulators to reduce errors. In: Henriksen, K., Battles, J.B., Marks, E.S., et al. (ed) Advances in Patient Safety: From Research to Implementation. Volume 4: Programs, Tools and Products. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US) (2005, February)Google Scholar
  14. Geomagic: (2015). Accessed 1 June 2015
  15. Iijima, K., Hirato, M., Miyagishima, T., et al.: Microrecording and image-guided stereotactic biopsy of deep-seated brain tumors. J. Neurosurg. 27, 1–11 (2015)Google Scholar
  16. Larsen, C.R., Soerensen, J., Grantcharov, T.P., et al.: Effect of virtual reality training on laparoscopic surgery: randomised controlled trial. Br. Med. J. 338, b1802 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Leksell Stereotactic System: (2015). Accessed 15 May 2015
  18. Moody, L., Baber, C., Arvanitis, T.N.: Objective surgical performance evaluation based on haptic feedback. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 85, 304–310 (2002)Google Scholar
  19. Poyade, M., Reyes-Lecuona, A., Leino, S.P., et al.: A high-level haptic interface for enhanced interaction within VirtoolsTM. In: Virtual and Mixed Reality, pp. 365–374. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Poyade, M., Kargas, M., Portela, V.: Haptic plug-in for Unity, Digital Design Studio, Glasgow School of Art.!/content/19580 (2014). Accessed 1 June 2015
  21. Rosseau, G., Bailes, J., del Maestro, R., et al.: The development of a virtual simulator for training neurosurgeons to perform and perfect endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal surgery. Neurosurgery. 73(1), 85–93 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Schirmer, C.M., Elder, J.B., Roitberg, B., et al.: Virtual reality-based simulation training for ventriculostomy: an evidence-based approach. Neurosurgery. 73(1), 66–73 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Schmidt, R.A., Wrisber, C.A.: Motor Learning and Performance. A Situation-Based Learning Approach, 4th edn. Human Kinetics, Champaign (2008)Google Scholar
  24. Timothy, R.C., Dwight, M., Nigel, W.J.: The role of haptics in medical training simulators: a survey of the state of the art. IEEE Trans. Haptics. 4, 51–66 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. TurboSquid: (2014). Accessed 01 May 2015
  26. Unity: Game Engine. (2015). Accessed 1 Oct 2014
  27. van der Meijden, O.A.J., Schijven, M.P.: The value of haptic feedback in conventional and robot-assisted minimal invasive surgery and virtual reality training: a current review. Surg. Endosc. 23(6), 1180–1190 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Viciana-Abad, R., Reyes-Lecuona, A., Poyade, M., et al.: The role of mismatches in the sensory feedback provided to indicate selection within a virtual environment. Multimed. Tools Appl. 55(3), 353–378 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. World Health Organization: WHO guidelines for safe surgery. Safe surgery saves lives. WHO/IER/PSP/2008.08-1E (2009). WHO Press, GenevaGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laura Pérez-Pachón
    • 1
    Email author
  • Matthieu Poyade
    • 2
  • Jennifer Brown
    • 3
  • Val Fallon
    • 4
  1. 1.School of Medicine, Medical Sciences and NutritionUniversity of AberdeenAberdeenUK
  2. 2.Glasgow School of Art, Digital Design StudioUniversity of GlasgowGlasgowUK
  3. 3.Institute of Neurological SciencesQueen Elizabeth University HospitalGlasgowUK
  4. 4.School of Biological and Chemical SciencesQueen Mary University of LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations