Creation and validation of patient specific anatomical models for prostate surgery planning using virtual reality

  • Paul A. Kay
  • Richard A. Robb
  • Robert P. Myers
  • Bernie F. King
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1131)

Abstract

Prostate surgery to remove cancer can be associated with morbidity due to complex and variable individual anatomy. We have developed and demonstrated the ability to accurately extract patient-specific anatomic regions from MRI pelvic scan data of pre-prostatectomy patients and to effectively convert these volume images to faithful polygonal surface representations of anatomic models for use in interactive virtual surgical planning. Models of the prostate gland and surrounding structures from several patients were created then evaluated by a radiologist and a surgeon who found them to be faithful and consistent with real anatomy. The surgeon provided confirming post-operative validation of the patient-specific models in planning radical prostatectomies.

Keywords

Virtual Reality Radical Prostatectomy Prostate Gland Virtual Reality System Pelvic Anatomy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Kay PA, Robb RA, King BF, Myers RP, Camp JJ: Surgical planning for prostatectomies using three-dimensional visualization and a virtual reality display system. Proceedings of Medical Imaging 1995, San Diego, California, February 26–March 2, 1995.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Starney TA, McNeal JE: Adenocarcinoma of the prostate, Campbell's Urology, 6th ed., vol. 2, pp. 1159–1221, 1992.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Garnick MB: The dilemmas of prostate cancer. Scientific American, pp 72–81, April 1994.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cameron BM, Manduca A, Robb RA: Surface generation for virtual reality displays with a limited polygonal budget. Proceedings International Conferences on Image Processing, October 1995.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    H. Hoppe: Surface Reconstruction from unorganized points. Doctoral Dissertation, University Washington, 1994.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Myers RP: Practical pelvic anatomy pertinent to radical retropubic prostatectomy. AUA Update Series, vol. 13, np. 4, pp. 26–31, 1994.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rifkin MD, Zerhouni EA, Gatsonis CA, Quint LE, Paaushter DM, Epstein JI, Hamper U, Walsh PC, McNeil BJ: Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography in staging early prostate cancer. New Engl J Med, vol. 323, pp. 621–626, 1990.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Robb RA: A software system for interactive and quantitative analysis of biomedical images, In: Höhne KH, Fuchs H, and Pizer SM: 3D Imaging in Medicine, NATO ASI Series, vol. F60, pp. 333–361, 1990.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lorensen WE, Cline HE: Marching Cubes: a high resolution 3-D surface construction algorithm. Computer Graphics 21(4), pp 163–169, 1987.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul A. Kay
    • 1
  • Richard A. Robb
    • 1
  • Robert P. Myers
    • 1
  • Bernie F. King
    • 1
  1. 1.Mayo Clinic and FoundationRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations