Surgical simulators integrating virtual and physical anatomies

According to literature evidences, simulation is of utmost importance for training purposes and for innovative surgical strategies assessment. Nowadays the market offers mainly two kind of simulators: rubber anatomies or virtual environments, each one with advantages and drawbacks. In this paper we describe a strategy to develop patientspecific simulators using a hybrid approach: silicone models of abdominal organs sensorized with electromagnetic coils, to acquire deformations, coupled with a virtual scene. As demonstrated, this approach allows to mix benefits of a real interaction with the physical replicas with the possibility to enrich the virtual visualization with add-ons and features difficult to obtain in the real environment.

[1]  Ziv Yaniv,et al.  Designing tracking software for image-guided surgery applications: IGSTK experience , 2008, International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery.

[2]  Thomas M Krummel,et al.  Simulation-based endovascular skills assessment: the future of credentialing? , 2008, Journal of vascular surgery.

[3]  Vincenzo Ferrari,et al.  A 3-D Mixed-Reality System for Stereoscopic Visualization of Medical Dataset , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[4]  Bin Luo,et al.  Elasticity and Echogenicity Analysis of Agarose Phantoms Mimicking Liver Tumors , 2006, Proceedings of the IEEE 32nd Annual Northeast Bioengineering Conference.

[5]  J. S. Røtnes,et al.  Challenges to the development of complex virtual reality surgical simulations , 2006, Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques.

[6]  V Ferrari,et al.  How to build patient‐specific synthetic abdominal anatomies. An innovative approach from physical toward hybrid surgical simulators , 2011, The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS.

[7]  A G Gallagher,et al.  Surgical simulation—a ‘good idea whose time has come’ , 2003, The British journal of surgery.

[8]  R. Dalman,et al.  The utility of endovascular simulation to improve technical performance and stimulate continued interest of preclinical medical students in vascular surgery. , 2009, Journal of surgical education.

[9]  Romain Raffin,et al.  Punctual constraint resolution and deformation path on NURBS , 2007 .

[10]  Teodor P. Grantcharov,et al.  Objective Assessment of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Skills Using a Virtual Reality Simulator , 2005, JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons.

[11]  Isao Sakaida,et al.  Prospective randomized study on the use of a computer‐based endoscopic simulator for training in esophagogastroduodenoscopy , 2008, Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology.

[12]  Alessandro Nava,et al.  In vivo mechanical characterization of human liver , 2008, Medical Image Anal..

[13]  W. McGaghie,et al.  A critical review of simulation‐based medical education research: 2003–2009 , 2010, Medical education.

[14]  Erik J. Schoon,et al.  Expert and construct validity of the Simbionix GI Mentor II endoscopy simulator for colonoscopy , 2007, Surgical Endoscopy.

[15]  Qiang Liu,et al.  Cyber surgery: Parameterized mesh for multi-modal surgery simulation , 2006, J. Vis..

[16]  Guido Gerig,et al.  User-guided 3D active contour segmentation of anatomical structures: Significantly improved efficiency and reliability , 2006, NeuroImage.

[17]  D. Lomanto,et al.  Enhancement of spatial orientation and haptic perception for master-slave robotic Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery (NOTES) , 2010, 2010 IEEE Conference on Robotics, Automation and Mechatronics.

[18]  R. Kneebone.  Simulation in surgical training: educational issues and practical implications , 2003, Medical education.