Comparison of 3-Dimensional and Augmented Reality Kidney Models With Conventional Imaging Data in the Preoperative Assessment of Children With Wilms Tumors
Nephron-sparing surgery can be considered in well-defined cases of unilateral and bilateral Wilms tumors, but the surgical procedure can be very challenging for the pediatric surgeon to perform. To assess the added value of personalized 3-dimensional (3-D) kidney models derived from conventional ima...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | JAMA network open 2019-04, Vol.2 (4), p.e192633-e192633 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Nephron-sparing surgery can be considered in well-defined cases of unilateral and bilateral Wilms tumors, but the surgical procedure can be very challenging for the pediatric surgeon to perform.
To assess the added value of personalized 3-dimensional (3-D) kidney models derived from conventional imaging data to enhance preoperative surgical planning.
In a survey study, the conventional imaging data of 10 Dutch children with Wilms tumors were converted to 3-D prints and augmented reality (AR) holograms and a panel of pediatric oncology surgeons (n = 7) assessed the quality of the different imaging methods during preoperative evaluation. Kidney models were created with 3-D printing and AR using a mixed reality headset for visualization.
Differences in the assessment of 4 anatomical structures (tumor, arteries, veins, and urinary collecting structures) using questionnaires. A Likert scale measured differences between the imaging methods, with scores ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree).
Of the 10 patients, 7 were girls, and the mean (SD) age was 3.7 (1.7) years. Compared with conventional imaging, the 3-D print and the AR hologram models were evaluated by the surgeons to be superior for all anatomical structures: tumor (median scores for conventional imaging, 4.07; interquartile range [IQR], 3.62-4.15 vs 3-D print, 4.67; IQR, 4.14-4.71; P = .008 and AR hologram, 4.71; IQR, 4.26-4.75; P = .002); arteries (conventional imaging, 3.62; IQR, 3.43-3.93 vs 3-D print, 4.54; IQR, 4.32-4.71; P = .002 and AR hologram, 4.83; IQR, 4.64-4.86; P |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2574-3805 2574-3805 |
DOI: | 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.2633 |