References

• 1. 1)
     • 2. Martin, S.: ‘The role of the first assistant in robotic assisted surgery’, Br. J. Perioper. Nurs., 2004, 14, (4), pp. 159–163.
  2. 2)
     • 19. Wang, J., Qian, L., Azimi, E., et al: ‘Prioritization and static error compensation for multi-camera collaborative tracking in augmented reality’. IEEE Virtual Reality (VR), Los Angeles, CA, USA, March 2017, pp. 335–336.
  3. 3)
     • 7. Qian, L., Barthel, A., Johnson, A., et al: ‘Comparison of optical see-through head-mounted displays for surgical interventions with object-anchored 2D-display’, Int. J. Comput. Assisted Radiol. Surg., 2017, 12, (6), pp. 901–910 (doi: 10.1007/s11548-017-1564-y).
  4. 4)
     • 4. Nayyar, R., Yadav, S., Singh, P., et al: ‘Impact of assistant surgeon on outcomes in robotic surgery’, Indian J. Urol., 2016, 32, (3), p. 204 (doi: 10.4103/0970-1591.185095).
  5. 5)
     • 20. Kwartowitz, D.M., Herrell, S.D., Galloway, R.L.: ‘Toward image-guided robotic surgery: determining intrinsic accuracy of the da Vinci robot’, Int. J. Comput. Assist. Radiol. Surg., 2006, 1, (3), pp. 157–165 (doi: 10.1007/s11548-006-0047-3).
  6. 6)
     • 15. Buchs, N.C., Volonte, F., Pugin, F., et al: ‘Augmented environments for the targeting of hepatic lesions during image-guided robotic liver surgery’, J. Surg. Res., 2013, 184, (2), pp. 825–831 (doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2013.04.032).
  7. 7)
     • 21. Abawi, D.F., Bienwald, J., Dorner, R.: ‘Accuracy in optical tracking with fiducial markers: an accuracy function for ARToolKit’. Proc. of the 3rd IEEE/ACM Int. Symp. on Mixed and Augmented Reality, Arlington, VA, USA, November 2004, pp. 260–261.
  8. 8)
     • 24. Owen, C.B., Zhou, J., Tang, A., et al: ‘Display-relative calibration for optical see-through head-mounted displays’. IEEE/ACM Intl. Symp. on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR), Arlington, VA, USA, November 2004, pp. 70–78.
  9. 9)
     • 25. Qian, L., Azimi, E., Kazanzides, P., et al: ‘Comprehensive tracker based display calibration for holographic optical see-through head-mounted display’, 2017, arXiv:1703.05834.
  10. 10)
      • 17. ‘Meta’, Available at http://www.metavision.com/, accessed: 6 June 2018.
  11. 11)
      • 1. Kumar, R., Hemal, A.K.: ‘The ‘scrubbed surgeon’ in robotic surgery’, World J. Urol., 2006, 24, (2), pp. 144–147 (doi: 10.1007/s00345-006-0068-0).
  12. 12)
      • 32. ‘Hololensartoolkit’. Available at https://github.com/qian256/HoloLensARToolKit, accessed: 6 June 2018.
  13. 13)
      • 33. ‘Locatable camera’. Available at https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/mixed-reality/locatable-camera, accessed: 6 June 2018.
  14. 14)
      • 31. Kato, H., Billinghurst, M.: ‘Marker tracking and HMD calibration for a video-based augmented reality conferencing system’. IEEE/ACM Intl. Workshop on Augmented Reality (IWAR), San Francisco, CA, USA, October 1999, pp. 85–94.
  15. 15)
      • 3. Sgarbura, O., Vasilescu, C.: ‘The decisive role of the patient-side surgeon in robotic surgery’, Surg. Endosc., 2010, 24, (12), pp. 3149–3155 (doi: 10.1007/s00464-010-1108-9).
  16. 16)
      • 34. Fontanelli, G., Ficuciello, F., Villani, L., et al: ‘Da Vinci research kit: PSM and MTM dynamic modelling’. IROS Workshop on Shared Platforms for Medical Robotics Research, Vancouver, Canada, 2017.
  17. 17)
      • 38. Itoh, Y., Hamasaki, T., Sugimoto, M.: ‘Occlusion leak compensation for optical see-through displays using a single-layer transmissive spatial light modulator’, IEEE Trans. Visual. Comput. Graphics, 2017, 23, (11), pp. 2463–2473 (doi: 10.1109/TVCG.2017.2734427).
  18. 18)
      • 18. Bernhardt, S., Nicolau, S.A., Soler, L., et al: ‘The status of augmented reality in laparoscopic surgery as of 2016’, Med. Image Anal., 2017, 37, pp. 66–90 (doi: 10.1016/j.media.2017.01.007).
  19. 19)
      • 11. Lo, B., Chung, A.J., Stoyanov, D., et al: ‘Real-time intraoperative 3D tissue deformation recovery’. IEEE Intl. Symp. on Biomedical Imaging: From Nano to Macro (ISBI), Paris, France, May 2008, pp. 1387–1390.
  20. 20)
      • 30. Quigley, M., Conley, K., Gerkey, B., et al: ‘ROS: an open-source robot operating system’. ICRA Workshop on Open Source Software, Kobe, Japan, 2009.
  21. 21)
      • 18. Thrun, S., Leonard, J.J.: ‘Simultaneous localization and mapping’, in Siciliano, B., Khatib, O. (Eds.): ‘Springer handbook of robotics’ (Springer, Berlin & Heidelberg, 2008), pp. 871–889.
  22. 22)
      • 8. Chen, L., Day, T.W., Tang, W., et al: ‘Recent developments and future challenges in medical mixed reality’. IEEE Intl. Symp. on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR), Nantes, France, October 2017, pp. 123–135.
  23. 23)
      • 28. Kazanzides, P., Chen, Z., Deguet, A., et al: ‘An open-source research kit for the da Vinci R surgical system’. IEEE Intl. Conf. on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Hong Kong, China, 31 May–7 June 2014, pp. 6434–6439.
  24. 24)
      • 14. Koppel, D., Wang, Y.-F., Lee, H.: ‘Image-based rendering and modeling in videoendoscopy’. IEEE Intl. Symp. on Biomedical Imaging: Nano to Macro, Arlington, VA, USA, April 2004, pp. 269–272.
  25. 25)
      • 6. Rolland, J.P., Fuchs, H.: ‘Optical versus video see-through head-mounted displays in medical visualization’, Presence, Teleoperators Virtual Environ., 2000, 9, (3), pp. 287–309 (doi: 10.1162/105474600566808).
  26. 26)
      • 12. Maier-Hein, L., Mountney, P., Bartoli, A., et al: ‘Optical techniques for 3D surface reconstruction in computer-assisted laparoscopic surgery’, Med. Image Anal., 2013, 17, (8), pp. 974–996 (doi: 10.1016/j.media.2013.04.003).
  27. 27)
      • 26. Hartley, R., Zisserman, A.: ‘Multiple view geometry in computer vision’ (Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA, 2003).
  28. 28)
      • 36. Edgcumbe, P., Pratt, P., Yang, G.-Z., et al: ‘Pico Lantern: surface reconstruction and augmented reality in laparoscopic surgery using a pick-up laser projector’, Med. Image Anal., 2015, 25, (1), pp. 95–102 (doi: 10.1016/j.media.2015.04.008).
  29. 29)
      • 37. Vagvolgyi, B., Niu, W., Chen, Z., et al: ‘Augmented virtuality for model-based teleoperation’. IEEE/RSJ Int. Conf. on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), Vancouver, Canada, 2017, pp. 3826–3833.
  30. 30)
      • 13. Koreeda, Y., Obata, S., Nishio, Y., et al: ‘Development and testing of an endoscopic pseudo-viewpoint alternating system’, Int. J. Comput. Assisted Radiol. Surg., 2015, 10, (5), pp. 619–628 (doi: 10.1007/s11548-014-1083-z).
  31. 31)
      • 23. Itoh, Y., Klinker, G.: ‘Interaction-free calibration for optical see-through head-mounted displays based on 3d eye localization’. IEEE Symp. on 3D User Interfaces (3DUI), Minneapolis, MN, USA, March 2014, pp. 75–82.
  32. 32)
      • 22. Tuceryan, M., Genc, Y., Navab, N.: ‘Single-point active alignment method (SPAAM) for optical see-through HMD calibration for augmented reality’, Presence, Teleoperators Virtual Environ., 2002, 11, (3), pp. 259–276 (doi: 10.1162/105474602317473213).
  33. 33)
      • 29. DiMaio, S., Hasser, C.: ‘The da Vinci research interface’. MICCAI Workshop on Systems and Arch. for Computer Assisted Interventions, Midas Journal, 2008, Available at http://hdl.handle.net/10380/1464.
  34. 34)
      • 5. Sung, G.T., Gill, I.S.: ‘Robotic laparoscopic surgery: a comparison of the da Vinci and Zeus systems’, Urology, 2001, 58, (6), pp. 893–898 (doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(01)01423-6).
  35. 35)
      • 27. Qian, L., Unberath, M., Yu, K., et al: ‘Towards virtual monitors for image guided interventions-real-time streaming to optical see-through head-mounted displays’, 2017, arXiv:1710.00808.
  36. 36)
      • 10. Wentink, B.: ‘Eye-hand coordination in laparoscopy – an overview of experiments and supporting aids’, Minim Invasive Ther. Allied Technol., 2001, 10, (3), pp. 155–162 (doi: 10.1080/136457001753192277).
  37. 37)
      • 35. Azimi, E., Qian, L., Kazanzides, P., et al: ‘Robust optical see-through head-mounted display calibration: taking anisotropic nature of user interaction errors into account’. IEEE Virtual Reality (VR 2017), Los Angeles, CA, USA, March 2017, pp. 219–220.
  38. 38)
      • 16. ‘Microsoft hololens’, Available at https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/hololens, accessed: 6 June 2018.