Feasibility of Mixed Reality-assisted physician-modified endografts

This study aimed to develop and evaluate a standardized workflow for physician-modified endografts using Mixed Reality (MxR) technology, and to compare it with a conventional method in a phantom model experiment. The experiment consisted of two parts. In the first part, the feasibility of using a virtual MxR overlay to guide fenestration marking on a phantom stent graft was tested. Thirty-two observers each marked four fenestrations (F1-F4), totaling 128 markings. In the second part, 12 observers performed both the MxR-assisted workflow and a conventional method. Outcomes included positional accuracy, procedure time, usability, and number of required reattempts. Accuracy was assessed by comparing absolute and relative distances from ideal positions and fenestration centroids. The required time of the workflow was recorded. Usability was evaluated using the System Usability Scale (SUS) and the Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire (PSSUQ). In the feasibility test, mean deviations from ideal positions were 1.3 mm (F1), 1.0 mm (F2), 1.0 mm (F3), and 1.5 mm (F4). Centroid errors were 0.7 mm (clock position) and 0.5 mm (cranio-caudal). The workflow took 5:31 minutes on average, with step 2 requiring 2:55 minutes. SUS and PSSUQ scores indicated high usability (84.2/100 and 1.8/7, respectively). In the comparative analysis, the MxR group showed comparable accuracy to the conventional method but required fewer reattempts (3 vs 10) and less time (6.7 vs 14.6 minutes; <i>P</i> < .01). Usability ratings were significantly higher for MxR (SUS, 85.1 vs 43.2; <i>P</i> < .01). The MxR-assisted workflow enabled accurate, efficient, and user-friendly physician-modified endografts planning. At least in this experimental setup, it outperformed the conventional method in usability and speed, supporting its potential for broader clinical applications.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Vascular Surgery Cases and Innovative Techniques
Published
2025-06-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvscit.2025.101889
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Surgical Simulation and Training
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.01

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Feasibility of Mixed Reality-assisted physician-modified endografts

Dittmar Böckler, Johannes Hatzl, Andreas S. Peters, Christian Uhl et al.
1 citations
Journal of Vascular Surgery Cases and Innovative Techniques
Surgical Simulation and Training
2.01
article

Feasibility of Mixed Reality-assisted physician-modified endografts

Dittmar Böckler, Johannes Hatzl, Andreas S. Peters, Christian Uhl, Natali Bauer, Katrin Meisenbacher, Dimitrios David Papazoglou, Jana Ebner, Daniel J. Henning, Alexandra Marquardt
article en
1 citations

Abstract

This study aimed to develop and evaluate a standardized workflow for physician-modified endografts using Mixed Reality (MxR) technology, and to compare it with a conventional method in a phantom model experiment. The experiment consisted of two parts. In the first part, the feasibility of using a virtual MxR overlay to guide fenestration marking on a phantom stent graft was tested. Thirty-two observers each marked four fenestrations (F1-F4), totaling 128 markings. In the second part, 12 observers performed both the MxR-assisted workflow and a conventional method. Outcomes included positional accuracy, procedure time, usability, and number of required reattempts. Accuracy was assessed by comparing absolute and relative distances from ideal positions and fenestration centroids. The required time of the workflow was recorded. Usability was evaluated using the System Usability Scale (SUS) and the Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire (PSSUQ). In the feasibility test, mean deviations from ideal positions were 1.3 mm (F1), 1.0 mm (F2), 1.0 mm (F3), and 1.5 mm (F4). Centroid errors were 0.7 mm (clock position) and 0.5 mm (cranio-caudal). The workflow took 5:31 minutes on average, with step 2 requiring 2:55 minutes. SUS and PSSUQ scores indicated high usability (84.2/100 and 1.8/7, respectively). In the comparative analysis, the MxR group showed comparable accuracy to the conventional method but required fewer reattempts (3 vs 10) and less time (6.7 vs 14.6 minutes; <i>P</i> < .01). Usability ratings were significantly higher for MxR (SUS, 85.1 vs 43.2; <i>P</i> < .01). The MxR-assisted workflow enabled accurate, efficient, and user-friendly physician-modified endografts planning. At least in this experimental setup, it outperformed the conventional method in usability and speed, supporting its potential for broader clinical applications.

Journal of Vascular Surgery Cases and Innovative TechniquesVol. 11(5)
Heidelberg University (DE), University Hospital of Bern (CH), University Hospital Heidelberg (DE), Brainlab (Germany) (DE), RWTH Aachen University (DE)
Heidelberger Stiftung Chirurgie
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
Surgical Simulation and Training
2.01
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.