Cargando…
Evaluation of a calibration rig for stereo laparoscopes
BACKGROUND: Accurate camera and hand‐eye calibration are essential to ensure high‐quality results in image‐guided surgery applications. The process must also be able to be undertaken by a nonexpert user in a surgical setting. PURPOSE: This work seeks to identify a suitable method for tracked stereo...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10614700/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36779419 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mp.16310 |
_version_ | 1785129077285322752 |
---|---|
author | Dowrick, Thomas Xiao, Guofang Nikitichev, Daniil Dursun, Eren van Berkel, Niels Allam, Moustafa Koo, Bongjin Ramalhinho, Joao Thompson, Stephen Gurusamy, Kurinchi Blandford, Ann Stoyanov, Danail Davidson, Brian R. Clarkson, Matthew J. |
author_facet | Dowrick, Thomas Xiao, Guofang Nikitichev, Daniil Dursun, Eren van Berkel, Niels Allam, Moustafa Koo, Bongjin Ramalhinho, Joao Thompson, Stephen Gurusamy, Kurinchi Blandford, Ann Stoyanov, Danail Davidson, Brian R. Clarkson, Matthew J. |
author_sort | Dowrick, Thomas |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Accurate camera and hand‐eye calibration are essential to ensure high‐quality results in image‐guided surgery applications. The process must also be able to be undertaken by a nonexpert user in a surgical setting. PURPOSE: This work seeks to identify a suitable method for tracked stereo laparoscope calibration within theater. METHODS: A custom calibration rig, to enable rapid calibration in a surgical setting, was designed. The rig was compared against freehand calibration. Stereo reprojection, stereo reconstruction, tracked stereo reprojection, and tracked stereo reconstruction error metrics were used to evaluate calibration quality. RESULTS: Use of the calibration rig reduced mean errors: reprojection (1.47 mm [SD 0.13] vs. 3.14 mm [SD 2.11], p‐value 1e−8), reconstruction (1.37 px [SD 0.10] vs. 10.10 px [SD 4.54], p‐value 6e−7), and tracked reconstruction (1.38 mm [SD 0.10] vs. 12.64 mm [SD 4.34], p‐value 1e−6) compared with freehand calibration. The use of a ChArUco pattern yielded slightly lower reprojection errors, while a dot grid produced lower reconstruction errors and was more robust under strong global illumination. CONCLUSION: The use of the calibration rig results in a statistically significant decrease in calibration error metrics, versus freehand calibration, and represents the preferred approach for use in the operating theater. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10614700 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-106147002023-10-31 Evaluation of a calibration rig for stereo laparoscopes Dowrick, Thomas Xiao, Guofang Nikitichev, Daniil Dursun, Eren van Berkel, Niels Allam, Moustafa Koo, Bongjin Ramalhinho, Joao Thompson, Stephen Gurusamy, Kurinchi Blandford, Ann Stoyanov, Danail Davidson, Brian R. Clarkson, Matthew J. Med Phys THERAPEUTIC INTERVENTIONS BACKGROUND: Accurate camera and hand‐eye calibration are essential to ensure high‐quality results in image‐guided surgery applications. The process must also be able to be undertaken by a nonexpert user in a surgical setting. PURPOSE: This work seeks to identify a suitable method for tracked stereo laparoscope calibration within theater. METHODS: A custom calibration rig, to enable rapid calibration in a surgical setting, was designed. The rig was compared against freehand calibration. Stereo reprojection, stereo reconstruction, tracked stereo reprojection, and tracked stereo reconstruction error metrics were used to evaluate calibration quality. RESULTS: Use of the calibration rig reduced mean errors: reprojection (1.47 mm [SD 0.13] vs. 3.14 mm [SD 2.11], p‐value 1e−8), reconstruction (1.37 px [SD 0.10] vs. 10.10 px [SD 4.54], p‐value 6e−7), and tracked reconstruction (1.38 mm [SD 0.10] vs. 12.64 mm [SD 4.34], p‐value 1e−6) compared with freehand calibration. The use of a ChArUco pattern yielded slightly lower reprojection errors, while a dot grid produced lower reconstruction errors and was more robust under strong global illumination. CONCLUSION: The use of the calibration rig results in a statistically significant decrease in calibration error metrics, versus freehand calibration, and represents the preferred approach for use in the operating theater. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023-02-22 2023-05 /pmc/articles/PMC10614700/ /pubmed/36779419 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mp.16310 Text en © 2023 The Authors. Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | THERAPEUTIC INTERVENTIONS Dowrick, Thomas Xiao, Guofang Nikitichev, Daniil Dursun, Eren van Berkel, Niels Allam, Moustafa Koo, Bongjin Ramalhinho, Joao Thompson, Stephen Gurusamy, Kurinchi Blandford, Ann Stoyanov, Danail Davidson, Brian R. Clarkson, Matthew J. Evaluation of a calibration rig for stereo laparoscopes |
title | Evaluation of a calibration rig for stereo laparoscopes |
title_full | Evaluation of a calibration rig for stereo laparoscopes |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of a calibration rig for stereo laparoscopes |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of a calibration rig for stereo laparoscopes |
title_short | Evaluation of a calibration rig for stereo laparoscopes |
title_sort | evaluation of a calibration rig for stereo laparoscopes |
topic | THERAPEUTIC INTERVENTIONS |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10614700/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36779419 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mp.16310 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dowrickthomas evaluationofacalibrationrigforstereolaparoscopes AT xiaoguofang evaluationofacalibrationrigforstereolaparoscopes AT nikitichevdaniil evaluationofacalibrationrigforstereolaparoscopes AT dursuneren evaluationofacalibrationrigforstereolaparoscopes AT vanberkelniels evaluationofacalibrationrigforstereolaparoscopes AT allammoustafa evaluationofacalibrationrigforstereolaparoscopes AT koobongjin evaluationofacalibrationrigforstereolaparoscopes AT ramalhinhojoao evaluationofacalibrationrigforstereolaparoscopes AT thompsonstephen evaluationofacalibrationrigforstereolaparoscopes AT gurusamykurinchi evaluationofacalibrationrigforstereolaparoscopes AT blandfordann evaluationofacalibrationrigforstereolaparoscopes AT stoyanovdanail evaluationofacalibrationrigforstereolaparoscopes AT davidsonbrianr evaluationofacalibrationrigforstereolaparoscopes AT clarksonmatthewj evaluationofacalibrationrigforstereolaparoscopes |