Visual Tracking vs Optical Tracking in Computer-Assisted Intervention

Computed-Assisted Intervention (CAI) aims to safely guide the surgeon during surgical interventions, which typically relies on Optical Tracking (OT) systems to provide the location of tools and instruments in a global reference frame, in real-time. Despite being very accurate, the existing OT systems have two main drawbacks: the difficulty of preserving lines-of-sight and the very high initial capital investment. We propose a new Visual Tracking (VT) system that effectively overcomes these issues by making use of 3D visual markers and an inexpensive monocular camera that can be located relatively close to the patient’s anatomy. Besides having these advantages, the new VT system also facilitates the navigation procedure by providing the guidance information in real-time using Augmented Reality. A thorough experimental evaluation demonstrates the validity of our approach, which is as accurate as the state-of-the-art OT system Optotrak Certus and better than Polaris Spectra [1]. It is also significantly easier to use since the requirement of the existence of a line-of-sight is always satisfied. Results obtained on an experiment that mimics a common procedure in the OR, as well as preliminary cadaver trials, confirm that the proposed VT system is clinically viable, making it clear that this is an important advance in the literature of tracking for CAI. Keywords—3D Registration, Computed-Assisted Intervention, Optical Tracking, Visual Tracking

[1]  Carolina Raposo,et al.  3D Registration of Curves and Surfaces Using Local Differential Information , 2018, 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[2]  Nan Cui,et al.  Augmented reality with Microsoft HoloLens holograms for near infrared fluorescence based image guided surgery , 2017, BiOS.

[3]  S. Kim,et al.  Application of Virtual, Augmented, and Mixed Reality to Urology , 2016, International neurourology journal.

[4]  Omar F. Rahman,et al.  Augmented Reality and Wearable Technology in Image-guided Navigation and Preoperative Planning , 2016, Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open.

[5]  João Pedro Barreto,et al.  Methods and systems for computer-aided surgery using intra-operative video acquired by a free moving camera , 2016 .

[6]  Sergey Y Turin,et al.  Advances in oncologic head and neck reconstruction: systematic review and future considerations of virtual surgical planning and computer aided design/computer aided modeling. , 2014, Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS.

[7]  Adrien Bartoli,et al.  Infinitesimal Plane-Based Pose Estimation , 2014, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[8]  Sébastien Ourselin,et al.  2D-3D Pose Tracking of Rigid Instruments in Minimally Invasive Surgery , 2014, IPCAI.

[9]  Wolfgang Birkfellner,et al.  Electromagnetic Tracking in Medicine—A Review of Technology, Validation, and Applications , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[10]  J. Mason,et al.  In-vivo alignment comparing patient specific instrumentation with both conventional and computer assisted surgery (CAS) instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty. , 2014, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[11]  Claudio Belvedere,et al.  Three‐dimensional implant position and orientation after total knee replacement performed with patient‐specific instrumentation systems , 2014, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[12]  Halit Eren,et al.  Measurement, Instrumentation, and Sensors Handbook : Spatial, Mechanical, Thermal, and Radiation Measurement , 2014 .

[13]  Venu Madhav Govindu,et al.  Efficient and Robust Large-Scale Rotation Averaging , 2013, 2013 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision.

[14]  Amber L. Simpson,et al.  A study on the theoretical and practical accuracy of conoscopic holography‐based surface measurements: toward image registration in minimally invasive surgery , 2012, The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS.

[15]  V. Lepetit,et al.  EPnP: An Accurate O(n) Solution to the PnP Problem , 2009, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[16]  Patrick Rives,et al.  Efficient Homography-Based Tracking and 3-D Reconstruction for Single-Viewpoint Sensors , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.

[17]  Marc Christian Metzger,et al.  Comparison of 3 optical navigation systems for computer-aided maxillofacial surgery. , 2008, Archives of otolaryngology--head & neck surgery.

[18]  Andrew D. Wiles,et al.  Accuracy assessment and interpretation for optical tracking systems , 2004, Medical Imaging: Image-Guided Procedures.

[19]  Paolo Fiorini,et al.  Medical Robotics and Computer-Integrated Surgery , 2008, 2008 32nd Annual IEEE International Computer Software and Applications Conference.

[20]  Richard M. Murray,et al.  A Mathematical Introduction to Robotic Manipulation , 1994 .

[21]  Jaime Gateno,et al.  Accuracy of a computer-aided surgical simulation protocol for orthognathic surgery: a prospective multicenter study. , 2013, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[22]  Michel Antunes,et al.  Plane-based Odometry using an RGB-D Camera , 2013, BMVC.

[23]  Wolfgang Heidrich,et al.  CALTag: High Precision Fiducial Markers for Camera Calibration , 2010, VMV.

[24]  Peter Kazanzides,et al.  The Importance of Accuracy Measurement Standards for Computer-Integrated Interventional Systems , 2010 .

[25]  Helmar Bergmann,et al.  Design and application of an assessment protocol for electromagnetic tracking systems. , 2005, Medical physics.

[26]  Jean-Yves Bouguet,et al.  Camera calibration toolbox for matlab , 2001 .