skip to main content


Search for: All records

Creators/Authors contains: "Abi���Nahed, Julien"

Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher. Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?

Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.

  1. Abstract Background

    User interfaces play a vital role in the planning and execution of an interventional procedure. The objective of this study is to investigate the effect of using different user interfaces for planning transrectal robot‐assisted MR‐guided prostate biopsy (MRgPBx) in an augmented reality (AR) environment.

    Method

    End‐user studies were conducted by simulating an MRgPBx system with end‐ and side‐firing modes. The information from the system to the operator was rendered on HoloLens as an output interface. Joystick, mouse/keyboard, and holographic menus were used as input interfaces to the system.

    Results

    The studies indicated that using a joystick improved the interactive capacity and enabled operator to plan MRgPBx in less time. It efficiently captures the operator's commands to manipulate the augmented environment representing the state of MRgPBx system.

    Conclusions

    The study demonstrates an alternative to conventional input interfaces to interact and manipulate an AR environment within the context of MRgPBx planning.

     
    more » « less
  2. Abstract Background

    This study presents user evaluation studies to assess the effect of information rendered by an interventional planning software on the operator's ability to plan transrectal magnetic resonance (MR)‐guided prostate biopsies using actuated robotic manipulators.

    Methods

    An intervention planning software was developed based on the clinical workflow followed for MR‐guided transrectal prostate biopsies. The software was designed to interface with a generic virtual manipulator and simulate an intervention environment using 2D and 3D scenes. User studies were conducted with urologists using the developed software to plan virtual biopsies.

    Results

    User studies demonstrated that urologists with prior experience in using 3D software completed the planning less time. 3D scenes were required to control all degrees‐of‐freedom of the manipulator, while 2D scenes were sufficient for planar motion of the manipulator.

    Conclusions

    The study provides insights on using 2D versus 3D environment from a urologist's perspective for different operational modes of MR‐guided prostate biopsy systems.

     
    more » « less