A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Visual extended reality tools in image-guided surgery in urology: a systematic review. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this systematic review is to assess the clinical implications of employing various Extended Reality (XR) tools for image guidance in urological surgery.

Methods: In June 2023, a systematic electronic literature search was conducted using the Medline database (via PubMed), Embase (via Ovid), Scopus, and Web of Science. The search strategy was designed based on the PICO (Patients, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) criteria. Study protocol was registered on PROSPERO (registry number CRD42023449025). We incorporated retrospective and prospective comparative studies, along with single-arm studies, which provided information on the use of XR, Mixed Reality (MR), Augmented Reality (AR), and Virtual Reality (VR) in urological surgical procedures. Studies that were not written in English, non-original investigations, and those involving experimental research on animals or cadavers were excluded from our analysis. The quality assessment of comparative and cohort studies was conducted utilizing the Newcastle-Ottawa scale, whilst for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), the Jadad scale was adopted. The level of evidence for each study was determined based on the guidelines provided by the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine.

Results: The initial electronic search yielded 1,803 papers after removing duplicates. Among these, 58 publications underwent a comprehensive review, leading to the inclusion of 40 studies that met the specified criteria for analysis. 11, 20 and 9 studies tested XR on prostate cancer, kidney cancer and miscellaneous, including bladder cancer and lithiasis surgeries, respectively. Focusing on the different technologies 20, 15 and 5 explored the potential of VR, AR and MR. The majority of the included studies (i.e., 22) were prospective non-randomized, whilst 7 and 11 were RCT and retrospective studies respectively. The included studies that revealed how these new tools can be useful both in preoperative and intraoperative setting for a tailored surgical approach.

Conclusions: AR, VR and MR techniques have emerged as highly effective new tools for image-guided surgery, especially for urologic oncology. Nevertheless, the complete clinical advantages of these innovations are still in the process of evaluation.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-024-06699-6DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

studies
9
extended reality
8
reality tools
8
tools image-guided
8
image-guided surgery
8
systematic review
8
included studies
8
reality
5
visual extended
4
tools
4

Similar Publications