Towards a Hybrid Navigation Interface: Comparison of a Slice Based Navigation System with In-Situ Visualization
Since the introduction of computer aided surgery various visualization methods have proposed for intraoperative navigation. Slice based navigation systems are commercially available and frequently used. These visualize three dimensional data on a two dimensional display as orthogonal slices controlled by the position of a surgical instrument. In-situ visualization was introduced as an alternative approach for intraoperative visualization. This technique visualizes three dimensional imaging data directly on the surgical object via three dimensional display technology. We compare monitor based navigation against video see-through augmented reality visualization. Furthermore, we compare both systems against a hybrid system that we have recently introduced. We created an experimental setup to simulate an exemplary application in trauma and orthopedic surgery, where a drill has to be navigated to a defined target region. We measured the speed and accuracy of three trauma surgeons with different level of experience performing the drilling task. The results show that the combination of both systems into one single user interface comprises the advantages of each system alone. Using the hybrid interface the surgeons performed the task with the accuracy of a standard navigation at the speed of the in-situ visualization.
KeywordsAugmented Reality Target Registration Error Augmented Reality System Augmented Reality Technology Navigation Mode
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Birkfellner, W., Figl, M., Huber, K., Watzinger, F., Wanschitz, F., Hummel, J., Hanel, R., Greimel, W., Homolka, P., Ewers, R., Bergmann, H.: A head-mounted operating binocular for augmented reality visualization in medicine–design and initial evaluation. IEEE Trans. Med. Imag. 21, 991–997 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Sauer, F., Khamene, A., Bascle, B., Rubino, G.J.: A Head-Mounted Display System for Augmented Reality Image Guidance: Towards Clinical Evaluation for iMRI-guided Neurosurgery. In: Niessen, W.J., Viergever, M.A. (eds.) MICCAI 2001. LNCS, vol. 2208, pp. 707–716. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.Azar, F.S., Perrin, N., Khamene, A., Vogt, S., Sauer, F.: User performance analysis of different image-based navigation systems for needle placement procedures. In: Proc. of the SPIE, vol. 5367, pp. 110–121 (2004)Google Scholar
- 6.Traub, J., Stefan, P., Heining, S.M., Sielhorst, T., Riquarts, C., Euler, E., Navab, N.: Stereoscopic augmented reality navigation for trauma surgery: cadaver experiment and usability study. In: Proc. of CARS 2006 (2006)Google Scholar
- 7.Sielhorst, T., Feuerstein, M., Traub, J., Kutter, O., Navab, N.: Campar: A software framework guaranteeing quality for medical augmented reality. In: Proc. of CARS 2006 (2006)Google Scholar
- 8.Sauer, F., Wenzel, F., Vogt, S., Tao, Y., Genc, Y., Bani-Hashemi, A.: Augmented workspace: designing an ar testbed. In: Proc. of IEEE and ACM ISAR, pp. 47–53 (2000)Google Scholar
- 9.Hoff, W.A., Vincent, T.L.: Analysis of head pose accuracy in augmented reality. IEEE Trans. Visualization and Computer Graphics 6 (2000)Google Scholar
- 10.Sauer, F., Schoepf, U.J., Khamene, A., Vogt, S., Das, M., Silverman, S.G.: Augmented reality system for ct-guided interventions: System description and initial phantom trials. In: Medical Imaging: Visualization, Image-Guided Procedures, and Display (2003)Google Scholar
- 11.Vogt, S., Khamene, A., Sauer, F., Niemann, H.: Single camera tracking of marker clusters: Multiparameter cluster optimization and experimental verification. In: Proc. of IEEE and ACM ISMAR, pp. 127–136 (2002)Google Scholar