Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

On-demand calibration and evaluation for electromagnetically tracked laparoscope in augmented reality visualization

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Common camera calibration methods employed in current laparoscopic augmented reality systems require the acquisition of multiple images of an entire checkerboard pattern from various poses. This lengthy procedure prevents performing laparoscope calibration in the operating room (OR). The purpose of this work was to develop a fast calibration method for electromagnetically (EM) tracked laparoscopes, such that the calibration can be performed in the OR on demand.

Methods

We designed a mechanical tracking mount to uniquely and snugly position an EM sensor to an appropriate location on a conventional laparoscope. A tool named fCalib was developed to calibrate intrinsic camera parameters, distortion coefficients, and extrinsic parameters (transformation between the scope lens coordinate system and the EM sensor coordinate system) using a single image that shows an arbitrary portion of a special target pattern. For quick evaluation of calibration results in the OR, we integrated a tube phantom with fCalib prototype and overlaid a virtual representation of the tube on the live video scene.

Results

We compared spatial target registration error between the common OpenCV method and the fCalib method in a laboratory setting. In addition, we compared the calibration re-projection error between the EM tracking-based fCalib and the optical tracking-based fCalib in a clinical setting. Our results suggest that the proposed method is comparable to the OpenCV method. However, changing the environment, e.g., inserting or removing surgical tools, might affect re-projection accuracy for the EM tracking-based approach. Computational time of the fCalib method averaged 14.0 s (range 3.5 s–22.7 s).

Conclusions

We developed and validated a prototype for fast calibration and evaluation of EM tracked conventional (forward viewing) laparoscopes. The calibration method achieved acceptable accuracy and was relatively fast and easy to be performed in the OR on demand.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Feuerstein M, Mussack T, Heining SM, Navab N (2008) Intraoperative laparoscope augmentation for port placement and resection planning in minimally invasive liver resection. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 27(3):355–369

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Shekhar R, Dandekar O, Bhat V, Philip M, Lei P, Godinez C, Sutton E, George I, Kavic S, Mezrich R, Park A (2010) Live augmented reality: a new visualization method for laparoscopic surgery using continuous volumetric computed tomography. Surg Endosc 24(8):1976–1985

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Leven J, Burschka D, Kumar R, Zhang G, Blumenkranz S, Dai XD, Awad M, Hager GD, Marohn M, Choti M, Hasser C, Taylor RH (2005) DaVinci canvas: a telerobotic surgical system with integrated, robot-assisted, laparoscopic ultrasound capability. Proc Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv 8(Pt 1):811–818

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cheung CL, Wedlake C, Moore J, Pautler SE, Peters TM (2010) Fused video and ultrasound images for minimally invasive partial nephrectomy: a phantom study. Proc Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv 13(Pt 3):408–415

    Google Scholar 

  5. Kang X, Azizian M, Wilson E, Wu K, Martin AD, Kane TD, Peters CA, Cleary K, Shekhar R (2014) Stereoscopic augmented reality for laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 28(7):2227–2235

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Shiu Y, Ahmad S (1989) Calibration of wrist-mounted robotic sensors by solving homogeneous transform equations of the form ax = xb. IEEE Trans Robot Autom 5(1):16–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bouguet JY (2015) Camera calibration with OpenCV. http://docs.opencv.org/doc/tutorials/calib3d/camera_calibration/camera_calibration.html. Accessed 20 July 2015

  8. Heikkila J, Silven O (1997) A four-step camera calibration procedure with implicit image correction. In: Proceedings of IEEE computer society conference computer vision pattern recognition. pp 1106–1112

  9. Zhang Z (1999) Flexible camera calibration by viewing a plane from unknown orientations. In: Proceedings of international conference on computer vision. pp 666–673

  10. Shekhar R, Liu X, Wilson E, Kang S, Petrosyan M, Kane TD (2015) Stereoscopic augmented reality visualization for laparoscopic surgery—initial clinical experience. In: Proceedings of annual meeting of society of American gastrointestinal and endoscopic surgeons

  11. Barreto JP, Roquette J, Sturm P, Fonseca F (2009) Automatic camera calibration applied to medical endoscopy. In: Proceedings of british machine vision conference

  12. Melo R, Barreto JP, Falcão G (2012) A new solution for camera calibration and real-time image distortion correction in medical endoscopy-initial technical evaluation. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 59(3):634–644

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Liu X, Su H, Kang S, Kane TD, Shekhar R (2015) Application of single-image camera calibration for ultrasound augmented laparoscopic visualization. In: Proceedings of SPIE medical, imaging. p 94151T

  14. Feuerstein M, Reichl T, Vogel J, Traub J, Navab N (2009) Magneto-optical tracking of flexible laparoscopic ultrasound: model-based online detection and correction of magnetic tracking errors. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 28(6):951–967

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Yaniv Z, Wilson E, Lindisch D, Cleary K (2009) Electromagnetic tracking in the clinical environment. Med Phys 36(3):876–892

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Franz AM, März K, Hummel J, Birkfellner W, Bendl R, Delorme S, Schlemmer HP, Meinzer HP, Maier-Hein L (2012) Electromagnetic tracking for US-guided interventions: standardized assessment of a new compact field generator. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 7(6):813–818

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Maier-Hein L, Franz AM, Birkfellner W, Hummel J, Gergel I, Wegner I, Meinzer HP (2012) Standardized assessment of new electromagnetic field generators in an interventional radiology setting. Med Phys 39(6):3424–3434

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Moore JT, Wiles AD, Wedlake C, Bainbridge D, Kiaii B, Luisa Trejos A, Patel R, Peters TM (2010) Integration of trans-esophageal echocardiography with magnetic tracking technology for cardiac interventions. In: Proceedings of SPIE medical, imaging. p 76252Y

  19. Liu X, Kang S, Wilson E, Peters CA, Kane TD, Shekhar R (2014) Evaluation of electromagnetic tracking for stereoscopic augmented reality laparoscopic visualization. Proc MICCAI Workshop Clin Image Based Proced Transl Res Med Imaging 8361:84–91

    Google Scholar 

  20. Atcheson B, Heide F, Heidrich W (2010) CALTag: High precision fiducial markers for camera calibration. In: 15th International workshop on vision, modeling and visualization. Siegen

  21. Johnson MP (2003) Exploiting quaternions to support expressive interactive character motion. Dissertation, MIT

  22. Hartley RI, Sturm P (1997) Triangulation. Comput Vis Image Underst 68(2):146–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Dr. Joao P. Barreto and Mr. Rui Melo of Perceive3D, SA, for providing the rdCalib API and the associated calibration target pattern. The authors would also like to thank James McConnaughey for his assistance in 3D printing the mechanical EM tracking mount. This work was supported partially by the National Institutes of Health Grant 1R41CA192504.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sheikh Zayed Institute for Pediatric Surgical Innovation, Children’s National Health System, 111 Michigan Avenue NW, Washington, DC, 20010, USA

    Xinyang Liu, Sukryool Kang, Timothy D. Kane & Raj Shekhar

  2. IGI Technologies, Inc., 387 Technology Drive #3110D, College Park, MD, 20742, USA

    William Plishker & George Zaki

Authors
  1. Xinyang Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. William Plishker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. George Zaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sukryool Kang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Timothy D. Kane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Raj Shekhar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Raj Shekhar.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (mov 26589 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Liu, X., Plishker, W., Zaki, G. et al. On-demand calibration and evaluation for electromagnetically tracked laparoscope in augmented reality visualization. Int J CARS 11, 1163–1171 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-016-1406-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-016-1406-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation