Augmented and Virtual Reality Instrument Tracking for Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery: A Feasibility and Accuracy Study
- PMID: 30830046
- DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003006
Augmented and Virtual Reality Instrument Tracking for Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery: A Feasibility and Accuracy Study
Abstract
Study design: Cadaveric animal laboratory study.
Objective: To evaluate the feasibility and accuracy of pedicle cannulation using an augmented reality surgical navigation (ARSN) system with automatic instrument tracking, yielding feedback of instrument position in relation to deep anatomy.
Summary of background data: Minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) has the possibility of reducing surgical exposure resulting in shorter hospital stays, lower blood loss and infection rates compared with open surgery but the drawback of limiting visual feedback to the surgeon regarding deep anatomy. MISS is mainly performed using image-guided 2D fluoroscopy, thus exposing the staff to ionizing radiation.
Methods: A hybrid operating room (OR) equipped with a robotic C-arm with integrated optical cameras for augmented reality instrument navigation was used. In two pig cadavers, cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were performed, a 3D model generated, and pedicle screw insertions were planned. Seventy-eight insertions were performed. Technical accuracy was assessed on post-insertion CBCTs by measuring the distance between the navigated device and the corresponding pre-planned path as well as the angular deviations. Drilling and hammering into the pedicle were also compared. Navigation time was measured. An independent reviewer assessed a simulated clinical accuracy according to Gertzbein.
Results: The technical accuracy was 1.7 ± 1.0 mm at the bone entry point and 2.0 ± 1.3 mm at the device tip. The angular deviation was 1.7 ± 1.7° in the axial and 1.6 ± 1.2° in the sagittal plane. Navigation time per insertion was 195 ± 93 seconds. There was no difference in accuracy between hammering and drilling into the pedicle. The clinical accuracy was 97.4% to 100% depending on the screw size considered for placement. No ionizing radiation was used during navigation.
Conclusion: ARSN with instrument tracking for MISS is feasible, accurate, and radiation-free during navigation.
Level of evidence: 3.
Similar articles
-
Accuracy of augmented reality surgical navigation for minimally invasive pedicle screw insertion in the thoracic and lumbar spine with a new tracking device.Spine J. 2020 Apr;20(4):629-637. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2019.12.009. Epub 2019 Dec 19. Spine J. 2020. PMID: 31863933
-
Feasibility and Accuracy of Thoracolumbar Minimally Invasive Pedicle Screw Placement With Augmented Reality Navigation Technology.Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2018 Jul 15;43(14):1018-1023. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002502. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2018. PMID: 29215500 Free PMC article.
-
Feasibility and accuracy of a robotic guidance system for navigated spine surgery in a hybrid operating room: a cadaver study.Sci Rep. 2020 May 5;10(1):7522. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-64462-x. Sci Rep. 2020. PMID: 32371880 Free PMC article.
-
[Camera-based navigation in the hybrid operating room].Chirurgie (Heidelb). 2023 Apr;94(4):307-311. doi: 10.1007/s00104-022-01777-7. Epub 2022 Dec 9. Chirurgie (Heidelb). 2023. PMID: 36494452 Free PMC article. Review. German.
-
Neuronavigation in minimally invasive spine surgery.Neurosurg Focus. 2013 Aug;35(2):E12. doi: 10.3171/2013.5.FOCUS13150. Neurosurg Focus. 2013. PMID: 23905950 Review.
Cited by
-
Operator independent reliability of direct augmented reality navigated pedicle screw placement and rod bending.N Am Spine Soc J. 2021 Oct 8;8:100084. doi: 10.1016/j.xnsj.2021.100084. eCollection 2021 Dec. N Am Spine Soc J. 2021. PMID: 35141649 Free PMC article.
-
Validation of diffuse reflectance spectroscopy with magnetic resonance imaging for accurate vertebral bone fat fraction quantification.Biomed Opt Express. 2019 Aug 1;10(8):4316-4328. doi: 10.1364/BOE.10.004316. eCollection 2019 Aug 1. Biomed Opt Express. 2019. PMID: 31453013 Free PMC article.
-
Virtual reality in spinal endoscopy: a paradigm shift in education to support spine surgeons.J Spine Surg. 2020 Jan;6(Suppl 1):S208-S223. doi: 10.21037/jss.2019.11.16. J Spine Surg. 2020. PMID: 32195429 Free PMC article.
-
Enabling technology in adult spinal deformity.Spine Deform. 2025 Apr 16. doi: 10.1007/s43390-025-01086-z. Online ahead of print. Spine Deform. 2025. PMID: 40234366 Review.
-
Towards Optical Imaging for Spine Tracking without Markers in Navigated Spine Surgery.Sensors (Basel). 2020 Jun 29;20(13):3641. doi: 10.3390/s20133641. Sensors (Basel). 2020. PMID: 32610555 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Phillips FM, Cheng I, Rampersaud YR, et al. Breaking through the “Glass Ceiling” of minimally invasive spine surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2016; 41 (suppl):S39–S43.
-
- Vazan M, Gempt J, Meyer B, et al. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a technical description and review of the literature. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2017; 159:1137–1146.
-
- Goldstein CL, Macwan K, Sundararajan K, et al. Perioperative outcomes and adverse events of minimally invasive versus open posterior lumbar fusion: meta-analysis and systematic review. J Neurosurg Spine 2016; 24:416–427.
-
- Lu VM, Kerezoudis P, Gilder HE, et al. Minimally invasive surgery versus open surgery spinal fusion for spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2017; 42:E177–E185.
-
- Wu MH, Dubey NK, Li YY, et al. Comparison of minimally invasive spine surgery using intraoperative computed tomography integrated navigation, fluoroscopy, and conventional open surgery for lumbar spondylolisthesis: a prospective registry-based cohort study. Spine J 2017; 17:1082–1090.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Research Materials