Mixed Reality and Augmented Reality in Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Literature Review
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Reversed shoulder arthroplasty is considered a treatment choice for arthritis and irreparable/massive cuff-tears. The accurate placement of the glenoid baseplate, particularly the positioning of the central peg or screw as well as the inclination and version has been considered critical in reducing implant related intra- and postoperative complications. While the implant positioning and position of the screws can be planned preoperatively on three-dimensional imaging modalities, the lack of intraoperative access to the information and the visual monitoring of variations achieved in the surgery can lead to low reproducibility. The ongoing innovation in the reality technologies aim to improve the accuracy and precision in implantation of the components with a hypothesis that it improves the implant survivorship and the outcomes.
Aims: This review aims to provide an overview on the currently available mixed and augmented reality technologies in shoulder arthroplasty, their differences, and potential future applications in shoulder arthroplasty.
Methods: For this literature review, all relevant published reports were found via searches in Medline (PubMed) database using the following medical subject headings (MeSH) terms: “virtual reality” or “augmented reality” or “mixed reality” with “orthopedics” or “orthopedic surgery.” Additional searches were carried out using the same key words in other databases including Ovid, Science Direct, SpringerLink, and Google Scholar, finding further relevant titles.
Results: The systematic search query resulted in 61 articles of which 8 articles met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Two out of 3 clinical studies were published by the same group of authors, whereas 1 study elaborated a technical note of the application of navigated augmented reality technology in reversed shoulder arthroplasty. Among the remaining 5 (non-clinical) studies, 3 studies were feasibility studies while 1 study used the navigated augmented reality technology over 12 cadaveric scapulae. The remaining 1 study was a proof-of-concept study over saw bone models based on the CT scans of one single patient.
Conclusions: This study gives the clarity between mixed and augmented reality that have been interchangeably used in the literature. We believe that the inclusion of mixed reality and augmented reality technology can enhance the precision during surgery, potentially reducing implant related complications and revision rates. However, further studies evaluating the radiographic parameters on implant-positioning, surgical, functional, and patient reported outcomes of this technology are called for its global acceptance.
Keywords:
Mixed reality, augmented reality, reversed shoulder arthroplasty, HoloLens, cuff tear arthropathy
Article Details
How to Cite
SADIGALE, Omkar; SCHNEIDER, Kerstin; TAHA, Mohy E.
Mixed Reality and Augmented Reality in Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Literature Review.
Medical Research Archives, [S.l.], v. 10, n. 9, sep. 2022.
ISSN 2375-1924.
Available at: <https://esmed.org/MRA/mra/article/view/3157>. Date accessed: 21 nov. 2024.
doi: https://doi.org/10.18103/mra.v10i9.3157.
Section
Review Articles
The Medical Research Archives grants authors the right to publish and reproduce the unrevised contribution in whole or in part at any time and in any form for any scholarly non-commercial purpose with the condition that all publications of the contribution include a full citation to the journal as published by the Medical Research Archives.
References
1. Cheng T, Feng JG, Liu T et al. Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review. International Orthopaedics (SICOT). 2009;33:1473. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-009-0743-z
2. Mancino F, Cacciola G, Malahias MA et al. What are the benefits of robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty over conventional manual total knee arthroplasty? A systematic review of comparative studies. Orthop Rev. 2020;12:8657. https://dx.doi.org/10.4081/or.2020.8657
3. Jones CW, Jerabek SA. Current role of computer navigation in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast. 2018;33:1989–93. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2018.01.027
4. Gregory TM, Gregory J, Sledge J et al. Surgery guided by mixed reality: presentation of a proof of concept. Acta orthopaedical. 2018;89(5):480-3. https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2018.1506974
5. Schairer WW, Nwachukwu BU, Lyman S et al. National utilization of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in the United States. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015;24(1):91–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2014.08.026
6. Kim SH, Wise BL, Zhang Y, Szabo RM. Increasing incidence of shoulder arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93(24):2249–54. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.J.01994
7. Day JS, Lau E, Ong KL, Williams GR, Ramsey ML, Kurtz SM. Prevalence and projections of total shoulder and elbow arthroplasty in the United States to 2015. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010;19(8):1115–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2010.02.009
8. Edwards TB, Trappey GJ, Riley C, O’Connor DP, Elkousy HA, Gartsman GM. Inferior tilt of the glenoid component does not decrease scapular notching in reverse shoulder arthroplasty: results of a prospective randomized study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012;21(5):641–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2011.08.057
9. Nyffeler RW, Sheikh R, Atkinson TS, Jacob HA, Favre P, Gerber C. Effects of glenoid component version on humeral head displacement and joint reaction forces: an experimental study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2006;15(5):625–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.se.2005.09.016
10. Gutierrez S, Walker M, Willis M, Pupello DR, Frankle MA. Effects of tilt and glenosphere eccentricity on baseplate/ bone interface forces in a computational model, validated by a mechanical model, of reverse shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2011;20(5):732-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2010.10.035
11. Zumstein MA, Pinedo M, Old J, Boileau P. Problems, complications, reoperations, and revisions in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2011;20(1):146–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2010.08.001
12. Milgram P, Kishino F. A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE TRANSACTIONS on Information and Systems. 1994;77(12):1321-9.
13. Lohre R, Warner JJ, Athwal GS, Goel DP. The evolution of virtual reality in shoulder and elbow surgery. JSES international. 2020;4(2):215-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jseint.2020.02.005
14. Zimmerman TG, Lanier J, Blanchard C, Bryson S, Harvill Y. A hand gesture interface device. Paper presented at: SIGCHI/GI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems and Graphics Interface; April 5-9. 1987. p. 189e92. Toronto, Canada. https://doi.org/10.1145/1165387.275628
15. Morgan M, Aydin A, Salih A, Robati S, Ahmed K. Current status of simulation-based training tools in orthopedic surgery: a systematic review. J Surg Educ. 2017;74:698e716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2017.01.005.
16. Petterson IL, Hertting A, Hagberg L, Theorell T. Are trends in work and health conditions interrelated? A study of Swedish hospital employees in the 1990s. J Occup Health Psychol. 2005;10:110-20. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/1076-8998.10.2.110
17. Willaert WIM, Aggarwal R, Van Herzeele I et al. Recent advancements in medical simulation: Patient-specific virtual reality simulation. World J Surg. 2012;36,1703–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-012-1489-0
18. Tabrizi LB, Mahvash M. Augmented reality–guided neurosurgery: Accuracy and intraoperative application of an image projection technique. J Neurosurg. 2015;123:206–11. https://doi.org/10.3171/2014.9.JNS141001
19. Blackwell MMS; Morgan FMS, DiGioia AM. Augmented reality and its future in orthopaedics. CORR. 1998;354:111-22. https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00003086-199809000-00014
20. Liebmann F, Roner S, von Atzigen M et al. Pedicle screw navigation using surface digitization on the Microsoft HoloLens. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2019;14:1157–65. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11548-019-01973-7
21. Azuma RT. A survey of augmented reality. Presence: teleoperators & virtual environments. 1997;6(4):355-85. https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.1997.6.4.355
22. Kelly PJ, Alker Jr GJ, Goerss S. Computer-assisted stereotactic laser microsurgery for the treatment of intracranial neoplasms. Neurosurgery. 1982;10(3):324-31. https://dx.doi.org/10.1227/00006123-198203000-00005
23. Verhey JT, Haglin JM, Verhey EM, Hartigan DE. Virtual, augmented, and mixed reality applications in orthopedic surgery. The International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery. 2020;16(2):e2067. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.2067
24. Ogawa H, Hasegawa S, Tsukada S, Matsubara M. A pilot study of augmented reality technology applied to the acetabular cup placement during total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplast. 2018;33,:1833–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2018.01.067
25. Navab N, Heining S and Traub J. Camera augmented mobile C-arm (CAMC): Calibration, accuracy study, and clinical applications. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging. 2010;29(7):1412-23. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMI.2009.2021947
26. Cleary K, Peters TM. Image-guided interventions: Technology review and clinical applications. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2010;12:119–42. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-bioeng-070909-105249
27. Chytas D, Nikolaou VS. Mixed reality for visualization of orthopedic surgical anatomy. World Journal of Orthopedics. 2021;12(10):727. https://dx.doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v12.i10.727
28. Doughty M, Ghugre NR, Wright GA. Augmenting performance: A systematic review of optical see-through head-mounted displays in surgery. Journal of Imaging. 2022;8(7):203. https://doi.org/10.3390/jimaging8070203
29. Gregory T, Gregory J, Dacheux C, Hurst SA. Surgeon experience of mixed reality headset technology during the COVID-19 pandemic: a multicenter international case series in orthopedic surgery. BMJ Surgery, Interventions, & Health Technologies. 2022;4(1):e000127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjsit-2021-000127
30. Rojas JT, Lädermann A, Ho SW, Rashid MS, Zumstein MA. Glenoid component placement assisted by augmented reality through a head-mounted display during reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Arthroscopy Techniques. 2022;11(5):e863-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eats.2021.12.046
31. Kriechling P, Roner S, Liebmann F et al. Augmented reality for base plate component placement in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a feasibility study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2021;141:1447–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-020-03542-z
32. Schlueter-Brust K, Henckel J, Katinakis F et al. Augmented-reality-assisted K-wire placement for glenoid component positioning in reversed shoulder arthroplasty: A proof-of-concept study. Journal of Personalized Medicine. 2021;11(8):777. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm11080777
33. Kriechling P, Loucas R, Loucas M et al. Augmented reality through head-mounted display for navigation of baseplate component placement in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a cadaveric study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2021 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-021-04025-5
34. Gu W, Shah K, Knopf J, Navab N, Unberath M. Feasibility of image-based augmented reality guidance of total shoulder arthroplasty using microsoft HoloLens 1. Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering: Imaging & Visualization. 2021;9(3):261-70. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681163.2020.1835556
35. Berhouet J, Slimane M, Facomprez M, Jiang M, Favard L. Views on a new surgical assistance method for implanting the glenoid component during total shoulder arthroplasty. Part 2: from three-dimensional reconstruction to augmented reality: feasibility study. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2019;105(2):211-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2018.08.021
36. Molina CA, Theodore N, Ahmed AK et al. Augmented reality–assisted pedicle screw insertion: A cadaveric proof-of-concept study. J Neurosurg Spine. 2019;31:139–46. https://doi.org/10.3171/2018.12.SPINE181142
37. Gibby JT, Swenson SA, Cvetko S et al. Head-mounted display augmented reality to guide pedicle screw placement utilizing computed tomography. Int J CARS. 2019;14:525–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-018-1814-7
38. Elmi-Terander A, Burström G, Nachabe R et al. Pedicle screw placement using augmented reality surgical navigation with intraoperative 3D imaging: A first In-human prospective cohort study. Spine J. 2019;44(7):517-25. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002876
39. Müller F, Roner S, Liebmann F, Spirig JM, Fürnstahl P, Farshad M. Augmented reality navigation for spinal pedicle screw instrumentation using intraoperative 3D imaging. Spine J 2020;20:621–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2019.10.012
40. Yoon JW, Chen RE, Han PK, Si P, Freeman WD, Pirris SM. Technical feasibility and safety of an intraoperative head-up display device during spine instrumentation. Int J Med Robotics Comput Assist Surg. 2017;13:e1770. doi: 10.1002/rcs.1770
41. Wu JR, Wang ML, Liu KC, Hu MH, Lee PY. Real-time advanced spinal surgery via visible patient model and augmented reality system. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2014;113:869–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2013.12.021
42. Kosterhon M, Gutenberg A, Kantelhardt SR, Archavlis E, Giese A. Navigation and Image Injection for Control of Bone Removal and Osteotomy Planes in Spine Surgery. Operative Neurosurgery. 2017;13(2):297-304. doi: 10.1093/ons/opw017
43. Ortega G, Wolff A, Baumgaertner M et al. Usefulness of a head mounted monitor device for viewing intraoperative fluoroscopy during orthopaedic procedures. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2008;128:1123–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-007-0500-y
44. Shen F, Chen B, Guo Q et al. Augmented reality patient-specific reconstruction plate design for pelvic and acetabular fracture surgery. Int J CARS. 2013;8:169–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-012-0775-5
45. Iannotti JP, Greeson C, Downing D, Sabesan V, Bryan JA. Effect of glenoid deformity on glenoid component placement in primary shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012;21:48-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2011.02.011.
46. Iannotti JP, Weiner S, Rodriguez E et al. Three-dimensional imaging and templating improve glenoid implant positioning. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015;97:651-8. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.N.00493.
47. Lädermann A, Lo EY, Schwitzguébel AJ, Yates E. Sub-scapularis and deltoid preserving anterior approach for reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2016;102:905-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2016.06.005
48. Sadoghi P, Vavken J, Leithner A et al. Benefit of intraoperative navigation on glenoid component positioning during total shoulder arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2015;135:41–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-014-2126-1
49. Aminov O, Regan W, Giles JW et al. Targeting repeatability of a less obtrusive surgical navigation procedure for total shoulder arthroplasty. Int J CARS. 2022;17:283–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-021-02503-0
50. Jud L, Fotouhi J, Andronic O et al. Applicability of augmented reality in orthopedic surgery. A systematic review. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2020;21:1-13. https:// doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-3110-2
51. Walch G, Vezeridis PS, Boileau P, Deransart P, Chaoui J. Three-dimensional planning and use of patient-specific guides improve glenoid component position: An in vitro study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015;24:302-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2014.05.029
52. Cabarcas BC, Cvetanovich GL, Gowd AK, Liu JN, Manderle BJ, Verma NN. Accuracy of patient-specific instrumentation in shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JSES Open Access. 2019;3(3):117-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jses.2019.07.002
53. Scott JW. Scott’s parabola. BMJ. 2001;323:1477.
2. Mancino F, Cacciola G, Malahias MA et al. What are the benefits of robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty over conventional manual total knee arthroplasty? A systematic review of comparative studies. Orthop Rev. 2020;12:8657. https://dx.doi.org/10.4081/or.2020.8657
3. Jones CW, Jerabek SA. Current role of computer navigation in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast. 2018;33:1989–93. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2018.01.027
4. Gregory TM, Gregory J, Sledge J et al. Surgery guided by mixed reality: presentation of a proof of concept. Acta orthopaedical. 2018;89(5):480-3. https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2018.1506974
5. Schairer WW, Nwachukwu BU, Lyman S et al. National utilization of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in the United States. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015;24(1):91–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2014.08.026
6. Kim SH, Wise BL, Zhang Y, Szabo RM. Increasing incidence of shoulder arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93(24):2249–54. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.J.01994
7. Day JS, Lau E, Ong KL, Williams GR, Ramsey ML, Kurtz SM. Prevalence and projections of total shoulder and elbow arthroplasty in the United States to 2015. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010;19(8):1115–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2010.02.009
8. Edwards TB, Trappey GJ, Riley C, O’Connor DP, Elkousy HA, Gartsman GM. Inferior tilt of the glenoid component does not decrease scapular notching in reverse shoulder arthroplasty: results of a prospective randomized study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012;21(5):641–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2011.08.057
9. Nyffeler RW, Sheikh R, Atkinson TS, Jacob HA, Favre P, Gerber C. Effects of glenoid component version on humeral head displacement and joint reaction forces: an experimental study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2006;15(5):625–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.se.2005.09.016
10. Gutierrez S, Walker M, Willis M, Pupello DR, Frankle MA. Effects of tilt and glenosphere eccentricity on baseplate/ bone interface forces in a computational model, validated by a mechanical model, of reverse shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2011;20(5):732-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2010.10.035
11. Zumstein MA, Pinedo M, Old J, Boileau P. Problems, complications, reoperations, and revisions in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2011;20(1):146–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2010.08.001
12. Milgram P, Kishino F. A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE TRANSACTIONS on Information and Systems. 1994;77(12):1321-9.
13. Lohre R, Warner JJ, Athwal GS, Goel DP. The evolution of virtual reality in shoulder and elbow surgery. JSES international. 2020;4(2):215-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jseint.2020.02.005
14. Zimmerman TG, Lanier J, Blanchard C, Bryson S, Harvill Y. A hand gesture interface device. Paper presented at: SIGCHI/GI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems and Graphics Interface; April 5-9. 1987. p. 189e92. Toronto, Canada. https://doi.org/10.1145/1165387.275628
15. Morgan M, Aydin A, Salih A, Robati S, Ahmed K. Current status of simulation-based training tools in orthopedic surgery: a systematic review. J Surg Educ. 2017;74:698e716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2017.01.005.
16. Petterson IL, Hertting A, Hagberg L, Theorell T. Are trends in work and health conditions interrelated? A study of Swedish hospital employees in the 1990s. J Occup Health Psychol. 2005;10:110-20. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/1076-8998.10.2.110
17. Willaert WIM, Aggarwal R, Van Herzeele I et al. Recent advancements in medical simulation: Patient-specific virtual reality simulation. World J Surg. 2012;36,1703–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-012-1489-0
18. Tabrizi LB, Mahvash M. Augmented reality–guided neurosurgery: Accuracy and intraoperative application of an image projection technique. J Neurosurg. 2015;123:206–11. https://doi.org/10.3171/2014.9.JNS141001
19. Blackwell MMS; Morgan FMS, DiGioia AM. Augmented reality and its future in orthopaedics. CORR. 1998;354:111-22. https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00003086-199809000-00014
20. Liebmann F, Roner S, von Atzigen M et al. Pedicle screw navigation using surface digitization on the Microsoft HoloLens. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2019;14:1157–65. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11548-019-01973-7
21. Azuma RT. A survey of augmented reality. Presence: teleoperators & virtual environments. 1997;6(4):355-85. https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.1997.6.4.355
22. Kelly PJ, Alker Jr GJ, Goerss S. Computer-assisted stereotactic laser microsurgery for the treatment of intracranial neoplasms. Neurosurgery. 1982;10(3):324-31. https://dx.doi.org/10.1227/00006123-198203000-00005
23. Verhey JT, Haglin JM, Verhey EM, Hartigan DE. Virtual, augmented, and mixed reality applications in orthopedic surgery. The International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery. 2020;16(2):e2067. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.2067
24. Ogawa H, Hasegawa S, Tsukada S, Matsubara M. A pilot study of augmented reality technology applied to the acetabular cup placement during total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplast. 2018;33,:1833–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2018.01.067
25. Navab N, Heining S and Traub J. Camera augmented mobile C-arm (CAMC): Calibration, accuracy study, and clinical applications. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging. 2010;29(7):1412-23. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMI.2009.2021947
26. Cleary K, Peters TM. Image-guided interventions: Technology review and clinical applications. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2010;12:119–42. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-bioeng-070909-105249
27. Chytas D, Nikolaou VS. Mixed reality for visualization of orthopedic surgical anatomy. World Journal of Orthopedics. 2021;12(10):727. https://dx.doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v12.i10.727
28. Doughty M, Ghugre NR, Wright GA. Augmenting performance: A systematic review of optical see-through head-mounted displays in surgery. Journal of Imaging. 2022;8(7):203. https://doi.org/10.3390/jimaging8070203
29. Gregory T, Gregory J, Dacheux C, Hurst SA. Surgeon experience of mixed reality headset technology during the COVID-19 pandemic: a multicenter international case series in orthopedic surgery. BMJ Surgery, Interventions, & Health Technologies. 2022;4(1):e000127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjsit-2021-000127
30. Rojas JT, Lädermann A, Ho SW, Rashid MS, Zumstein MA. Glenoid component placement assisted by augmented reality through a head-mounted display during reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Arthroscopy Techniques. 2022;11(5):e863-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eats.2021.12.046
31. Kriechling P, Roner S, Liebmann F et al. Augmented reality for base plate component placement in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a feasibility study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2021;141:1447–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-020-03542-z
32. Schlueter-Brust K, Henckel J, Katinakis F et al. Augmented-reality-assisted K-wire placement for glenoid component positioning in reversed shoulder arthroplasty: A proof-of-concept study. Journal of Personalized Medicine. 2021;11(8):777. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm11080777
33. Kriechling P, Loucas R, Loucas M et al. Augmented reality through head-mounted display for navigation of baseplate component placement in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a cadaveric study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2021 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-021-04025-5
34. Gu W, Shah K, Knopf J, Navab N, Unberath M. Feasibility of image-based augmented reality guidance of total shoulder arthroplasty using microsoft HoloLens 1. Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering: Imaging & Visualization. 2021;9(3):261-70. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681163.2020.1835556
35. Berhouet J, Slimane M, Facomprez M, Jiang M, Favard L. Views on a new surgical assistance method for implanting the glenoid component during total shoulder arthroplasty. Part 2: from three-dimensional reconstruction to augmented reality: feasibility study. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2019;105(2):211-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2018.08.021
36. Molina CA, Theodore N, Ahmed AK et al. Augmented reality–assisted pedicle screw insertion: A cadaveric proof-of-concept study. J Neurosurg Spine. 2019;31:139–46. https://doi.org/10.3171/2018.12.SPINE181142
37. Gibby JT, Swenson SA, Cvetko S et al. Head-mounted display augmented reality to guide pedicle screw placement utilizing computed tomography. Int J CARS. 2019;14:525–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-018-1814-7
38. Elmi-Terander A, Burström G, Nachabe R et al. Pedicle screw placement using augmented reality surgical navigation with intraoperative 3D imaging: A first In-human prospective cohort study. Spine J. 2019;44(7):517-25. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002876
39. Müller F, Roner S, Liebmann F, Spirig JM, Fürnstahl P, Farshad M. Augmented reality navigation for spinal pedicle screw instrumentation using intraoperative 3D imaging. Spine J 2020;20:621–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2019.10.012
40. Yoon JW, Chen RE, Han PK, Si P, Freeman WD, Pirris SM. Technical feasibility and safety of an intraoperative head-up display device during spine instrumentation. Int J Med Robotics Comput Assist Surg. 2017;13:e1770. doi: 10.1002/rcs.1770
41. Wu JR, Wang ML, Liu KC, Hu MH, Lee PY. Real-time advanced spinal surgery via visible patient model and augmented reality system. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2014;113:869–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2013.12.021
42. Kosterhon M, Gutenberg A, Kantelhardt SR, Archavlis E, Giese A. Navigation and Image Injection for Control of Bone Removal and Osteotomy Planes in Spine Surgery. Operative Neurosurgery. 2017;13(2):297-304. doi: 10.1093/ons/opw017
43. Ortega G, Wolff A, Baumgaertner M et al. Usefulness of a head mounted monitor device for viewing intraoperative fluoroscopy during orthopaedic procedures. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2008;128:1123–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-007-0500-y
44. Shen F, Chen B, Guo Q et al. Augmented reality patient-specific reconstruction plate design for pelvic and acetabular fracture surgery. Int J CARS. 2013;8:169–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-012-0775-5
45. Iannotti JP, Greeson C, Downing D, Sabesan V, Bryan JA. Effect of glenoid deformity on glenoid component placement in primary shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012;21:48-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2011.02.011.
46. Iannotti JP, Weiner S, Rodriguez E et al. Three-dimensional imaging and templating improve glenoid implant positioning. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015;97:651-8. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.N.00493.
47. Lädermann A, Lo EY, Schwitzguébel AJ, Yates E. Sub-scapularis and deltoid preserving anterior approach for reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2016;102:905-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2016.06.005
48. Sadoghi P, Vavken J, Leithner A et al. Benefit of intraoperative navigation on glenoid component positioning during total shoulder arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2015;135:41–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-014-2126-1
49. Aminov O, Regan W, Giles JW et al. Targeting repeatability of a less obtrusive surgical navigation procedure for total shoulder arthroplasty. Int J CARS. 2022;17:283–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-021-02503-0
50. Jud L, Fotouhi J, Andronic O et al. Applicability of augmented reality in orthopedic surgery. A systematic review. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2020;21:1-13. https:// doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-3110-2
51. Walch G, Vezeridis PS, Boileau P, Deransart P, Chaoui J. Three-dimensional planning and use of patient-specific guides improve glenoid component position: An in vitro study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015;24:302-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2014.05.029
52. Cabarcas BC, Cvetanovich GL, Gowd AK, Liu JN, Manderle BJ, Verma NN. Accuracy of patient-specific instrumentation in shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JSES Open Access. 2019;3(3):117-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jses.2019.07.002
53. Scott JW. Scott’s parabola. BMJ. 2001;323:1477.