[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Augmented Reality (AR) in Orthopedics: Current Applications and Future Directions

  • The Use of Technology in Orthopaedic Surgery—Intraoperative and Post Operative Management (C Krueger and S Bini, Section Editors)
  • Published:
Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Imaging technologies (X-ray, CT, MRI, and ultrasound) have revolutionized orthopedic surgery, allowing for the more efficient diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment of musculoskeletal aliments. The current review investigates recent literature surrounding the impact of augmented reality (AR) imaging technologies on orthopedic surgery. In particular, it investigates the impact that AR technologies may have on provider cognitive burden, operative times, occupational radiation exposure, and surgical precision and outcomes.

Recent Findings

Many AR technologies have been shown to lower provider cognitive burden and reduce operative time and radiation exposure while improving surgical precision in pre-clinical cadaveric and sawbones models. So far, only a few platforms focusing on pedicle screw placement have been approved by the FDA. These technologies have been implemented clinically with mixed results when compared to traditional free-hand approaches.

Summary

It remains to be seen if current AR technologies can deliver upon their multitude of promises, and the ability to do so seems contingent upon continued technological progress. Additionally, the impact of these platforms will likely be highly conditional on clinical indication and provider type. It remains unclear if AR will be broadly accepted and utilized or if it will be reserved for niche indications where it adds significant value. One thing is clear, orthopedics’ high utilization of pre- and intra-operative imaging, combined with the relative ease of tracking rigid structures like bone as compared to soft tissues, has made it the clear beachhead market for AR technologies in medicine.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
£29.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Not applicable

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Verhey JT, Haglin JM, Verhey EM, Hartigan DE. Virtual, augmented, and mixed reality applications in orthopedic surgery. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg. 2020;16:e2067. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.2067.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Chong Y, Sethi DK, Loh CHY, Lateef F. Going forward with Pokemon Go. J Emerg Trauma Shock. 2018;11:243–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. • Xu B, Yang Z, Jiang S, Zhou Z, Jiang B, Yin S. Design and validation of a spinal surgical navigation system based on spatial augmented reality. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020;45:E1627–e33. Demonstrates the fesibility and pre-clinical accuracy of utilizing a projection based AR system for pedicle screw placement. Also highlights the difficulties of translating such projection based technologies and methods to the clinical setting

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ma L, Zhao Z, Zhang B, Jiang W, Fu L, Zhang X, Liao H. Three-dimensional augmented reality surgical navigation with hybrid optical and electromagnetic tracking for distal intramedullary nail interlocking. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg. 2018;14:e1909. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.1909.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ma L, Zhao Z, Chen F, Zhang B, Fu L, Liao H. Augmented reality surgical navigation with ultrasound-assisted registration for pedicle screw placement: a pilot study. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2017;12:2205–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-017-1652-z.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Wu J-R, Wang M-L, Liu K-C, Hu M-H, Lee P-Y. Real-time advanced spinal surgery via visible patient model and augmented reality system. Comput Methods Prog Biomed. 2014;113:869–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2013.12.021.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Gavaghan K, Oliveira-Santos T, Peterhans M, Reyes M, Kim H, Anderegg S, Weber S. Evaluation of a portable image overlay projector for the visualisation of surgical navigation data: phantom studies. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2012;7:547–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-011-0660-7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Nguyen NQ, Priola SM, Ramjist JM, Guha D, Dobashi Y, Lee K, Lu M, Androutsos D, Yang V. Machine vision augmented reality for pedicle screw insertion during spine surgery. J Clin Neurosci. 2020;72:350–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. •• Elmi-Terander A, Burström G, Nachabé R, et al. Augmented reality navigation with intraoperative 3D imaging vs fluoroscopy-assisted free-hand surgery for spine fixation surgery: a matched-control study comparing accuracy. Sci Rep. 2020;10:707. First study comparing the clinical accuracy of pedical screw placement with Augmented Reality Surgical Navigation (ARSN) and free-hand (FH) techniques. This matched-control study demonstrated that ARSN provided higher screw placement accuracy than the FH approach

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. •• Edström E, Burström G, Persson O, et al. Does Augmented reality navigation increase pedicle screw density compared to free-hand technique in deformity surgery? Single Surgeon Case Series of 44 Patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020;45:E1085–e90. Study suggest that ARSN will allow surgeons to increase their pedicle screw density in deformity cases when compared to FH approaches. This suggests that surgeons can use ARSN to place better constructs in deformity cases potentially lowering the need for revision surguries

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. • Edström E, Burström G, Omar A, et al. Augmented reality surgical navigation in spine surgery to minimize staff radiation exposure. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020;45:E45–e53. Demonstrates the ability of AR technologies to lower occupational radiation exposure

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Burström G, Nachabe R, Homan R, Hoppenbrouwers J, Holthuizen R, Persson O, Edström E, Elmi-Terander A. Frameless patient tracking with adhesive optical skin markers for augmented reality surgical navigation in spine surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020;45:1598–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Alexander C, Loeb AE, Fotouhi J, Navab N, Armand M, Khanuja HS. Augmented reality for acetabular component placement in direct anterior total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplast. 2020;35:1636–41.e3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. • Weidert S, Wang L, Landes J, et al. Video-augmented fluoroscopy for distal interlocking of intramedullary nails decreased radiation exposure and surgical time in a bovine cadaveric setting. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg. 2019;15:e1995. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.1995. Highlights the impact of surgical training level on an AR system's efficacy. The AR system only reduced radiation exposure when utilized by less experienced surgeons

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Elmi-Terander A, Burström G, Nachabe R, Skulason H, Pedersen K, Fagerlund M, Ståhl F, Charalampidis A, Söderman M, Holmin S, Babic D, Jenniskens I, Edström E, Gerdhem P. Pedicle screw placement using augmented reality surgical navigation with intraoperative 3D imaging. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019;44:517–25. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000002876.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Cho HS, Park MS, Gupta S, Han I, Kim HS, Choi H, Hong J. Can augmented reality be helpful in pelvic bone cancer surgery? An in vitro study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2018;476:1719–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999.0000000000000233.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Fischer M, Fuerst B, Lee SC, Fotouhi J, Habert S, Weidert S, Euler E, Osgood G, Navab N. Preclinical usability study of multiple augmented reality concepts for K-wire placement. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2016;11:1007–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-016-1363-x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Fallavollita P, Brand A, Wang L, Euler E, Thaller P, Navab N, Weidert S. An augmented reality C-arm for intraoperative assessment of the mechanical axis: a preclinical study. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2016;11:2111–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-016-1426-z.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Londei R, Esposito M, Diotte B, Weidert S, Euler E, Thaller P, Navab N, Fallavollita P. Intra-operative augmented reality in distal locking. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2015;10:1395–403. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-015-1169-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ponce BA, Jennings JK, Clay TB, May MB, Huisingh C, Sheppard ED. Telementoring: use of augmented reality in orthopaedic education: AAOS exhibit selection. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014;96:e84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. U-Thainual P, Fritz J, Moonjaita C, Ungi T, Flammang A, Carrino JA, Fichtinger G, Iordachita I. MR image overlay guidance: system evaluation for preclinical use. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2013;8:365–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-012-0788-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Shen F, Chen B, Guo Q, Qi Y, Shen Y. Augmented reality patient-specific reconstruction plate design for pelvic and acetabular fracture surgery. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2013;8:169–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-012-0775-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Yeo CT, Ungi T, U-Thainual P, Lasso A, McGraw RC, Fichtinger G. The effect of augmented reality training on percutaneous needle placement in spinal facet joint injections. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2011;58:2031–7. https://doi.org/10.1109/tbme.2011.2132131.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Navab N, Heining S-M, Traub J. Camera augmented mobile C-arm (CAMC): Calibration, accuracy study, and clinical applications. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2010;29:1412–23. https://doi.org/10.1109/tmi.2009.2021947.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Fischer GS, Deguet A, Csoma C, Taylor RH, Fayad L, Carrino JA, Zinreich SJ, Fichtinger G. MRI image overlay: application to arthrography needle insertion. Comput Aided Surg. 2007;12:2–14. https://doi.org/10.3109/10929080601169930.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Fichtinger G, Deguet A, Masamune K, Balogh E, Fischer GS, Mathieu H, Taylor RH, Zinreich SJ, Fayad LM. Image overlay guidance for needle insertion in CT scanner. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2005;52:1415–24. https://doi.org/10.1109/tbme.2005.851493.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Dibble CF, Molina CA. Device profile of the XVision-spine (XVS) augmented-reality surgical navigation system: overview of its safety and efficacy. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2021;18:1–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Urakov TM. Augmented reality-assisted pedicle instrumentation: versatility across major instrumentation sets. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020;45:E1622–e6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. • Dennler C, Jaberg L, Spirig J, et al. Augmented reality-based navigation increases precision of pedicle screw insertion. J Orthop Surg Res. 2020;15:174. Study shows that the impact and efficacy of AR technologies are conditional on the operator's level of surgical training

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Urakov TM, Wang MY, Levi AD. Workflow caveats in augmented reality-assisted pedicle instrumentation: Cadaver lab. World Neurosurg. 2019;126:e1449–e55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Gibby JT, Swenson SA, Cvetko S, Rao R, Javan R. Head-mounted display augmented reality to guide pedicle screw placement utilizing computed tomography. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2019;14:525–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-018-1814-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Liu H, Auvinet E, Giles J, Rodriguez Y, Baena F. Augmented reality based navigation for computer assisted hip resurfacing: a proof of concept study. Ann Biomed Eng. 2018;46:1595–605. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-018-2055-1.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Hiranaka T, Fujishiro T, Hida Y, Shibata Y, Tsubosaka M, Nakanishi Y, Okimura K, Uemoto H. Augmented reality: the use of the PicoLinker smart glasses improves wire insertion under fluoroscopy. World J Orthop. 2017;8:891–4. https://doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v8.i12.891.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Lungu AJ, Swinkels W, Claesen L, Tu P, Egger J, Chen X. A review on the applications of virtual reality, augmented reality and mixed reality in surgical simulation: an extension to different kinds of surgery. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2021;18:47–62.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Keating TC, Jacobs JJ. Augmented reality in orthopedic practice and education. Orthop Clin North Am. 2021;52:15–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Park BJ, Hunt SJ, Martin C 3rd, Nadolski GJ, Wood BJ, Gade TP. Augmented and mixed reality: technologies for enhancing the future of IR. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2020;31:1074–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Nguyen NQ, Cardinell J, Ramjist JM, Lai P, Dobashi Y, Guha D, Androutsos D, Yang VXD. An augmented reality system characterization of placement accuracy in neurosurgery. J Clin Neurosci. 2020;72:392–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Vávra P, Roman J, Zonča P, Ihnát P, Němec M, Kumar J, Habib N, el-Gendi A. Recent development of augmented reality in surgery: a review. J Healthc Eng. 2017;2017:4574172–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Bradley MP, Benson JR, Muir JM. Accuracy of acetabular component positioning using computer-assisted navigation in direct anterior total hip arthroplasty. Cureus. 2019;11:e4478.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Sadrameli SS, Jafrani R, Staub BN, Radaideh M, Holman PJ. Minimally invasive, stereotactic, wireless, percutaneous pedicle screw placement in the lumbar spine: accuracy rates with 182 consecutive screws. Int J Spine Surg. 2018;12:650–8. https://doi.org/10.14444/5081.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Van Duren BH, Sugand K, Wescott R, Carrington R, Hart A. Augmented reality fluoroscopy simulation of the guide-wire insertion in DHS surgery: a proof of concept study. Med Eng Phys. 2018;55:52–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medengphy.2018.02.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Andress S, Johnson A, Unberath M, Winkler AF, Yu K, Fotouhi J, Weidert S, Osgood G, Navab N. On-the-fly augmented reality for orthopedic surgery using a multimodal fiducial. J Med Imaging (Bellingham). 2018;5(2):021209. https://doi.org/10.1117/1.jmi.5.2.021209.full.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Fotouhi J, Alexander CP, Unberath M, Taylor G, Lee SC, Fuerst B, Johnson A, Osgood GM, Taylor RH, Khanuja H, Armand M, Navab N. Plan in 2-D, execute in 3-D: an augmented reality solution for cup placement in total hip arthroplasty. J Medical Imaging. 2018;5(2):021205. https://doi.org/10.1117/1.jmi.5.2.021205.full.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Pokhrel S, Alsadoon A, Prasad PWC, Paul M. A novel augmented reality (AR) scheme for knee replacement surgery by considering cutting error accuracy. Int J Med Robot. 2019;15:e1958.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Mentis HM, Chellali A, Manser K, Cao CGL, Schwaitzberg SD. A systematic review of the effect of distraction on surgeon performance: directions for operating room policy and surgical training. Surg Endosc. 2016;30:1713–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4443-z.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Cleary K, Peters TM. Image-Guided Interventions: Technology Review and Clinical Applications. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2010;12:119–42. https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-bioeng-070909-105249

  47. Liao H, Ishihara H, Tran HH, Masamune K, Sakuma I, Dohi T. Precision-guided surgical navigation system using laser guidance and 3D autostereoscopic image overlay. Comput Med Imaging Graph. 2010;34:46–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Reaungamornrat S, Otake Y, Uneri A, Schafer S, Mirota DJ, Nithiananthan S, Stayman JW, Kleinszig G, Khanna AJ, Taylor RH, Siewerdsen JH. An on-board surgical tracking and video augmentation system for C-arm image guidance. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2012;7:647–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-012-0682-9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Lee SC, Fuerst B, Fotouhi J, Fischer M, Osgood G, Navab N. Calibration of RGBD camera and cone-beam CT for 3D intra-operative mixed reality visualization. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2016;11:967–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-016-1396-1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Ma L, Fan Z, Ning G, Zhang X, Liao H. 3D Visualization and augmented reality for orthopedics. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2018;1093:193–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Liao H, Hata N, Nakajima S, Iwahara M, Sakuma I, Dohi T. Surgical navigation by autostereoscopic image overlay of integral videography. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed. 2004;8:114–21. https://doi.org/10.1109/titb.2004.826734.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. • Siemionow KB, Katchko KM, Lewicki P, Luciano CJ. Augmented reality and artificial intelligence-assisted surgical navigation: technique and cadaveric feasibility study. J Craniovertebr Junction Spine. 2020;11:81–5. Demonstrates the utility of integral videography and an augmented reality and artificial intelligence (ARAI) assisted surgical navigation system for the accurate determination of pedicle screw entry points

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Baumgartner R, Libuit K, Ren D, et al. Reduction of radiation exposure from C-arm fluoroscopy during orthopaedic trauma operations with introduction of real-time dosimetry. J Orthop Trauma. 2016;30:e53–e8. https://journals.lww.com/jorthotrauma/Fulltext/2016/02000/Reduction_of_Radiation_Exposure_From_C_Arm.11.aspx. Accessed 14 July 2021.

  54. Yu E, Khan SN. Does less invasive spine surgery result in increased radiation exposure? a systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014;472:1738–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-014-3503-3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Yeo CH, Gordon R, Nusem I. Improving operating theatre communication between the orthopaedics surgeon and radiographer. ANZ J Surg. 2014;84:316–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Müller MC, Strauss A, Pflugmacher R, Nähle CP, Pennekamp PH, Burger C, Wirtz DC. Evaluation of radiation exposure of personnel in an orthopaedic and trauma operation theatre using the new real-time dosimetry system "dose aware". Z Orthop Unfall. 2014;152:381–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Bronsard N, Boli T, Challali M, de Dompsure R, Amoretti N, Padovani B, Bruneton G, Fuchs A, de Peretti F. Comparison between percutaneous and traditional fixation of lumbar spine fracture: intraoperative radiation exposure levels and outcomes. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2013;99:162–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2012.12.012.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Lee K, Lee KM, Park MS, Lee B, Kwon DG, Chung CY. Measurements of surgeons’ exposure to ionizing radiation dose during intraoperative use of C-arm fluoroscopy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012;37:1240–4. https://journals.lww.com/spinejournal/Fulltext/2012/06150/Measurements_of_Surgeons__Exposure_to_Ionizing.9.aspx. Accessed 14 July 2021.

  59. Müller LP, Suffner J, Wenda K, Mohr W, Rommens PM. Radiation exposure to the hands and the thyroid of the surgeon during intramedullary nailing. Injury. 1998;29:461–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Blattert TR, Fill UA, Kunz E, Panzer W, Weckbach A, Regulla DF. Skill dependence of radiation exposure for the orthopaedic surgeon during interlocking nailing of long-bone shaft fractures: a clinical study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2004;124:659–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-004-0743-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Gausden EB, Christ AB, Zeldin R, Lane JM, McCarthy MM. Tracking cumulative radiation exposure in orthopaedic surgeons and residents: what dose are we getting? J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017;99:1324–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Mehlman CT, DiPasquale TG. Radiation exposure to the orthopaedic surgical team during fluoroscopy: "how far away is far enough?". J Orthop Trauma. 1997;11:392–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Von Der Heide AM, Fallavollita P, Wang L, et al. Camera-augmented mobile C-arm (CamC): a feasibility study of augmented reality imaging in the operating room. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg. 2018;14:e1885. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.1885.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Elmi-Terander A, Nachabe R, Skulason H, Pedersen K, Söderman M, Racadio J, Babic D, Gerdhem P, Edström E. Feasibility and accuracy of thoracolumbar minimally invasive pedicle screw placement with augmented reality navigation technology. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2018;43:1018–23. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000002502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. • Burström G, Nachabe R, Persson O, Edström E, Elmi Terander A. Augmented and virtual reality instrument tracking for minimally invasive spine surgery: a feasibility and accuracy study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019;44:1097–104. ARSN for minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) is feasible, accurate and can eliminate occupational radiation exposure during navigation

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Kraus M, Weiskopf J, Dreyhaupt J, Krischak G, Gebhard F. Computer-aided surgery does not increase the accuracy of dorsal pedicle screw placement in the thoracic and lumbar spine: a retrospective analysis of 2,003 pedicle screws in a level I trauma center. Global Spine J. 2015;5:93–101. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1396430.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Doke T, Liang JT, Onogi S, Nakajima Y. Fluoroscopy-based laser guidance system for linear surgical tool insertion depth control. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2015;10:275–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-014-1079-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Hawi N, Liodakis E, Suero EM, Stuebig T, Citak M, Krettek C. Radiological outcome and intraoperative evaluation of a computer-navigation system for femoral nailing: a retrospective cohort study. Injury. 2014;45:1632–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2014.05.039.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Wilharm A, Marintschev I, Hofmann GO, Gras F. 2D-fluoroscopic based navigation for Gamma 3 nail insertion versus conventional procedure- a feasibility study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2013;14:74. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-14-74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  70. Hamming NM, Daly MJ, Irish JC, Siewerdsen JH. Automatic image-to-world registration based on x-ray projections in cone-beam CT-guided interventions. Med Phys. 2009;36:1800–12. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3117609.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  71. Moreschini O, Petrucci V, Cannata R. Insertion of distal locking screws of tibial intramedullary nails: a comparison between the free-hand technique and the SURESHOT™ Distal Targeting System. Injury. 2014;45:405–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2013.09.023.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. •• Elmi-Terander A, Burström G, Nachabe R, et al. Pedicle screw placement using augmented reality surgical navigation with intraoperative 3D imaging: a first in-human prospective cohort study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019;44:517–25. First clinical study of an ARSN, demonstrated high accuracy and acceptable naviagtion time for the placement of thoracic and lumbar pedicle screws in 20 patients

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Carl B, Bopp M, Saß B, Nimsky C. Microscope-based augmented reality in degenerative spine surgery: initial experience. World Neurosurg. 2019;128:e541–e51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Cho HS, Park YK, Gupta S, Yoon C, Han I, Kim HS, Choi H, Hong J. Augmented reality in bone tumour resection: an experimental study. Bone Joint Res. 2017;6:137–43.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Agten CA, Dennler C, Rosskopf AB, Jaberg L, Pfirrmann CWA, Farshad M. Augmented reality-guided lumbar facet joint injections. Investig Radiol. 2018;53:495–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Ogawa H, Hasegawa S, Tsukada S, Matsubara M. A pilot study of augmented reality technology applied to the acetabular cup placement during total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplast. 2018;33:1833–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2018.01.067.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Abe Y, Sato S, Kato K, Hyakumachi T, Yanagibashi Y, Ito M, Abumi K. A novel 3D guidance system using augmented reality for percutaneous vertebroplasty. J Neurosurg Spine. 2013;19:492–501. https://doi.org/10.3171/2013.7.spine12917.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Su P, Zhang W, Peng Y, Liang A, Du K, Huang D. Use of computed tomographic reconstruction to establish the ideal entry point for pedicle screws in idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J. 2012;21:23–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-011-1962-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Chan A, Parent E, Narvacan K, San C, Lou E. Intraoperative image guidance compared with free-hand methods in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis posterior spinal surgery: a systematic review on screw-related complications and breach rates. Spine J. 2017;17:1215–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2017.04.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. •• Jin M, Liu Z, Qiu Y, Yan H, Han X, Zhu Z. Incidence and risk factors for the misplacement of pedicle screws in scoliosis surgery assisted by O-arm navigation—analysis of a large series of one thousand, one hundred and forty five screws. Int Orthop. 2017;41:773–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-016-3353-6. Study demonstrates that the accuracy of an ARSN system decreases drastically with increasing distance from the reference frame

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Fichtner J, Hofmann N, Rienmüller A, Buchmann N, Gempt J, Kirschke JS, Ringel F, Meyer B, Ryang YM. Revision rate of misplaced pedicle screws of the thoracolumbar spine–comparison of three-dimensional fluoroscopy navigation with freehand placement: a systematic analysis and review of the literature. World Neurosurg. 2018;109:e24–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2017.09.091.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Code Availability

Not applicable

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Simpson Querrey Institute (SQI), Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA

    Andrew A. Furman & Wellington K. Hsu

  2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA

    Andrew A. Furman & Wellington K. Hsu

Authors
  1. Andrew A. Furman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wellington K. Hsu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Andrew Furman – Idea generation, manuscript research, writing, and preparation

Dr. Wellington Hsu – Idea generation, manuscript editing

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrew A. Furman.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Andrew Furman – No conflicts

Dr. Wellington Hsu – Advisory board member of Stryker, Medtronic, Asahi, Bioventus

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on The Use of Technology in Orthopaedic Surgery—Intraoperative and Post Operative Management

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Furman, A.A., Hsu, W.K. Augmented Reality (AR) in Orthopedics: Current Applications and Future Directions. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med 14, 397–405 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12178-021-09728-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12178-021-09728-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation