Robot‐assisted augmented reality surgical navigation based on optical tracking for mandibular reconstruction surgery

• Published in: Medical physics (Lancaster) 2024-01, Vol.51 (1), p.363-377
• Main Authors: Shao, Long, Li, Xing, Fu, Tianyu, Meng, Fanhao, Zhu, Zhihui, Zhao, Ruiqi, Huo, Minghao, Xiao, Deqiang, Fan, Jingfan, Lin, Yucong, Zhang, Tao, Yang, Jian
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Augmented Reality; Free Tissue Flaps - surgery; Humans; Mandible - diagnostic imaging; Mandible - surgery; mandibular reconstruction; Mandibular Reconstruction - methods; optical tracking; Robotics; robot‐assisted; spatial registration; Surgery, Computer-Assisted - methods
• ISSN: 0094-2405; 2473-4209
• DOI: 10.1002/mp.16598

Purpose This work proposes a robot‐assisted augmented reality (AR) surgical navigation system for mandibular reconstruction. The system accurately superimposes the preoperative osteotomy plan of the mandible and fibula into a real scene. It assists the doctor in osteotomy quickly and safely under the guidance of the robotic arm. Methods The proposed system mainly consists of two modules: the AR guidance module of the mandible and fibula and the robot navigation module. In the AR guidance module, we propose an AR calibration method based on the spatial registration of the image tracking marker to superimpose the virtual models of the mandible and fibula into the real scene. In the robot navigation module, the posture of the robotic arm is first calibrated under the tracking of the optical tracking system. The robotic arm can then be positioned at the planned osteotomy after the registration of the computed tomography image and the patient position. The combined guidance of AR and robotic arm can enhance the safety and precision of the surgery. Results The effectiveness of the proposed system was quantitatively assessed on cadavers. In the AR guidance module, osteotomies of the mandible and fibula achieved mean errors of 1.61 ± 0.62 and 1.08 ± 0.28 mm, respectively. The mean reconstruction error of the mandible was 1.36 ± 0.22 mm. In the AR‐robot guidance module, the mean osteotomy errors of the mandible and fibula were 1.47 ± 0.46 and 0.98 ± 0.24 mm, respectively. The mean reconstruction error of the mandible was 1.20 ± 0.36 mm. Conclusions The cadaveric experiments of 12 fibulas and six mandibles demonstrate the proposed system's effectiveness and potential clinical value in reconstructing the mandibular defect with a free fibular flap.