In-vivo evaluation of an augmented reality enhanced ultrasound needle guidance system for minimally invasive procedures in porcine models: a preclinical comparative study.
Sanjit Datta, Robert F Short, Jeffrey W Milsom, Charles Martin Iii, Gaurav Gadodia, Gabrielle Stefy Bailey, Crew Weunski, Michael Evans, Bradley B Pua
{"title":"<i>In-vivo</i> evaluation of an augmented reality enhanced ultrasound needle guidance system for minimally invasive procedures in porcine models: a preclinical comparative study.","authors":"Sanjit Datta, Robert F Short, Jeffrey W Milsom, Charles Martin Iii, Gaurav Gadodia, Gabrielle Stefy Bailey, Crew Weunski, Michael Evans, Bradley B Pua","doi":"10.7602/jmis.2025.28.3.122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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 (<i>p</i> > 0.05). Needle repositions were significantly less when using the ARNGS + SOC (0.8 vs. 3.0, <i>p</i> = 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":73832,"journal":{"name":"Journal of minimally invasive surgery","volume":"28 3","pages":"122-129"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12439044/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of minimally invasive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7602/jmis.2025.28.3.122","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: 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.
Methods: 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.
Results: 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 (p > 0.05). Needle repositions were significantly less when using the ARNGS + SOC (0.8 vs. 3.0, p = 0.01).
Conclusion: 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.