↓ Skip to main content

Combined 2D and 3D tracking of surgical instruments for minimally invasive and robotic-assisted surgery

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
96 Mendeley
Title
Combined 2D and 3D tracking of surgical instruments for minimally invasive and robotic-assisted surgery
Published in
International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery, April 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11548-016-1393-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiaofei Du, Maximilian Allan, Alessio Dore, Sebastien Ourselin, David Hawkes, John D. Kelly, Danail Stoyanov

Abstract

Computer-assisted interventions for enhanced minimally invasive surgery (MIS) require tracking of the surgical instruments. Instrument tracking is a challenging problem in both conventional and robotic-assisted MIS, but vision-based approaches are a promising solution with minimal hardware integration requirements. However, vision-based methods suffer from drift, and in the case of occlusions, shadows and fast motion, they can be subject to complete tracking failure. In this paper, we develop a 2D tracker based on a Generalized Hough Transform using SIFT features which can both handle complex environmental changes and recover from tracking failure. We use this to initialize a 3D tracker at each frame which enables us to recover 3D instrument pose over long sequences and even during occlusions. We quantitatively validate our method in 2D and 3D with ex vivo data collected from a DVRK controller as well as providing qualitative validation on robotic-assisted in vivo data. We demonstrate from our extended sequences that our method provides drift-free robust and accurate tracking. Our occlusion-based sequences additionally demonstrate that our method can recover from occlusion-based failure. In both cases, we show an improvement over using 3D tracking alone suggesting that combining 2D and 3D tracking is a promising solution to challenges in surgical instrument tracking.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 96 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 24%
Student > Master 16 17%
Student > Bachelor 10 10%
Researcher 10 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 7%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 18 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 34 35%
Computer Science 26 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 10%
Physics and Astronomy 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 20 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 June 2016.
All research outputs
#20,334,427
of 22,879,161 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery
#667
of 848 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,616
of 300,388 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery
#21
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,879,161 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 848 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 300,388 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.