In-vivo evaluation of an augmented reality enhanced ultrasound needle guidance system for minimally invasive procedures in porcine models: a preclinical comparative study

This study compared the accuracy, safety, and efficacy of standard-of-care (SOC) ultrasound and augmented reality needle guidance system (ARNGS) used adjunctively for percutaneous needle placement in porcine models. Four live swine underwent a model creation procedure in which metallic fiducials wer...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of minimally invasive surgery Vol. 28; no. 3; pp. 122 - 129
Main Authors: Datta, Sanjit, Short, Robert F., Milsom, Jeffrey W., Martin III, Charles, Gadodia, Gaurav, Stefy Bailey, Gabrielle, Weunski, Crew, Evans, Michael, Pua, Bradley B.
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: Korea (South) The Korean Society of Endo-Laparoscopic & Robotic Surgery 15.09.2025
대한내시경로봇외과학회
Subjects:
augmented reality
computed tomography angiography
interventional radiography
needle biopsy
ultrasonography
일반외과학
Computed tomography angiography
Interventional radiography
Augmented reality
Ultrasonography
Needle biopsy
ISSN:2234-778X, 2234-5248, 2234-5248
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This study compared the accuracy, safety, and efficacy of standard-of-care (SOC) ultrasound and augmented reality needle guidance system (ARNGS) used adjunctively for percutaneous needle placement in porcine models. Four live swine underwent a model creation procedure in which metallic fiducials were percutaneously implanted into the livers (n = 8 per animal; 32 total) and kidneys (n = 4 per animal;16 total) to serve as "lesions." Computed tomography was used to create three-dimensional volumetric images of the anatomy. Four physicians, with limited previous ARNGS experience and blinded to the target locations, positioned needles at the targets using either SOC alone or ARNGS + SOC. No adverse events occurred. Mean target registration error (TRE) was 3.0 mm (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.4-3.6 mm; n = 22) with SOC (an average needle depth, 8.0 cm) and 2.9 mm (95% CI, 2.2-3.5 mm; n = 24) with ARNGS + SOC (an average needle depth, 7.6 cm). The first-attempt success rate was 39.1% (9/23) for SOC and 41.7% (10/24) for ARNGS + SOC. There was not a significant difference in TRE or first-pass success rate between the two groups ( > 0.05). Needle repositions were significantly less when using the ARNGS + SOC (0.8 vs. 3.0, = 0.01). In a preclinical study, the ARNGS + SOC was as accurate and safe as SOC in needle targeting of implanted targets. A reduction in needle repositioning suggests its potential to streamline procedures and reduce the risk of complications. This novel image fusion method merits further evaluation.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
https://doi.org/10.7602/jmis.2025.28.3.122
ISSN:2234-778X
2234-5248
2234-5248
DOI:10.7602/jmis.2025.28.3.122