↓ Skip to main content

Augmented reality in a tumor resection model

Overview of attention for article published in Surgical Endoscopy, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
patent
1 patent

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Augmented reality in a tumor resection model
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy, August 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00464-017-5791-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pauline Chauvet, Toby Collins, Clement Debize, Lorraine Novais-Gameiro, Bruno Pereira, Adrien Bartoli, Michel Canis, Nicolas Bourdel

Abstract

Augmented Reality (AR) guidance is a technology that allows a surgeon to see sub-surface structures, by overlaying pre-operative imaging data on a live laparoscopic video. Our objectives were to evaluate a state-of-the-art AR guidance system in a tumor surgical resection model, comparing the accuracy of the resection with and without the system. Our system has three phases. Phase 1: using the MRI images, the kidney's and pseudotumor's surfaces are segmented to construct a 3D model. Phase 2: the intra-operative 3D model of the kidney is computed. Phase 3: the pre-operative and intra-operative models are registered, and the laparoscopic view is augmented with the pre-operative data. We performed a prospective experimental study on ex vivo porcine kidneys. Alginate was injected into the parenchyma to create pseudotumors measuring 4-10 mm. The kidneys were then analyzed by MRI. Next, the kidneys were placed into pelvictrainers, and the pseudotumors were laparoscopically resected. The AR guidance system allows the surgeon to see tumors and margins using classical laparoscopic instruments, and a classical screen. The resection margins were measured microscopically to evaluate the accuracy of resection. Ninety tumors were segmented: 28 were used to optimize the AR software, and 62 were used to randomly compare surgical resection: 29 tumors were resected using AR and 33 without AR. The analysis of our pathological results showed 4 failures (tumor with positive margins) (13.8%) in the AR group, and 10 (30.3%) in the Non-AR group. There was no complete miss in the AR group, while there were 4 complete misses in the non-AR group. In total, 14 (42.4%) tumors were completely missed or had a positive margin in the non-AR group. Our AR system enhances the accuracy of surgical resection, particularly for small tumors. Crucial information such as resection margins and vascularization could also be displayed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 9 12%
Researcher 7 9%
Other 6 8%
Other 15 20%
Unknown 19 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 26%
Engineering 15 20%
Computer Science 10 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Unspecified 2 3%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 22 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 17 June 2021.
All research outputs
#6,210,392
of 22,997,544 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#1,188
of 6,096 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,386
of 316,580 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#44
of 144 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,997,544 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,096 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
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 316,580 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 144 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.