Performance Comparison of Augmented Reality Versus Ultrasound Guidance for Puncture: A Phantom Study.

Abstract

Augmented reality (AR) is an innovative approach that could assist percutaneous procedures; by directly seeing "through" a phantom, targeting a lesion might be more intuitive than using ultrasound (US). The objective of this study was to compare the performance of experienced interventional radiologists and operators untrained in soft tissue lesion puncture using AR guidance and standard US guidance. Three trained interventional radiologists with 5-10years of experience and three untrained operators performed punctures of five targets in an abdominal phantom, with US guidance and AR guidance. Correct targeting, accuracy (defined as the Euclidean distance between the tip and the center of the target), planning time, and puncture time were documented. Accuracy was higher for the trained group than the untrained group using US guidance (1mm versus 4mm, p = 0.001), but not when using AR guidance (4mm vs. 4mm, p = 0.76). All operators combined, no significant difference was found concerning accuracy between US and AR guidance (2mm vs. 4mm, p = 0.09), but planning time and puncture time were significantly shorter using AR (respectively, 15.1s vs. 74s, p < 0.001; 16.1s vs. 59s; p < 0.001). Untrained and trained operators obtained comparable accuracy in percutaneous punctures when using AR guidance whereas US performance was better in the experienced group. All operators together, accuracy was similar between US and AR guidance, but shorter planning time, puncture time were found for AR guidance.