to study search History No further version available for comparison

A virtual reality environment using a head-mounted display for interactive and immersive 3D operation planning and training for complex liver cases: Is it better than traditional methods? – study protocol for a randomized controlled trail

Organizational Data

DRKS-ID:
DRKS00011000
Recruitment Status:
Recruiting ongoing
Date of registration in DRKS:
2016-08-19
Last update in DRKS:
2016-08-19
Registration type:
Prospective

Acronym/abbreviation of the study

No Entry

URL of the study

No Entry

Brief summary in lay language

The surgical removal of malignant liver lesions is in most cases the only curative treatment. Liver surgery aims to safely remove all affected tissue while minimizing the extent of the resection and loss of functional tissue. To achieve this complex operative interventions in the liver require accurate imaging and visualization of pathological lesions and the operating field. Sectional imaging (e.g. computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging) is one of the most helpful tools, which aids the surgeon in preparing for the operation, carrying out measurements, visualizing the individual anatomy of the patient, assessing specific risks, taking surgical decisions and thinking through certain operational steps in advance. At the moment radiological imaging data is displayed in stacked sectional views on a standard monitor. The fusion of anatomy, anomalies and pathological changes is solely dependent on the capacity for remembering and the spatial imagination of the operating surgeon. Modern methods allow for a better, immersive and intuitive visualization of all relevant information (patient information, 3D-model of the organs and radiological imaging data) in a virtual reality environment. Particularly the three-dimensional visualization of imaging data is more intuitive. 3D-operation-planning in comparison to traditional 2D-methods proved beneficial in complex liver resection with big central tumors. So far these 3D-models are displayed on 2D-monitors. The present study will evaluate a system which can visualize the operating field of a patient in a three-dimensional, interactive, intuitive and immersive fashion with a head-mounted display (e.g. Oculus Rift™ (Oculus VR® LLC, Irvine, CA, USA). For this patient specific radiological imaging data (computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging) will be used to create a 3D-model and integrated into a virtual reality environment with a virtual-reality (VR) headset. The operating field can be visualized realistically. In this study we will evaluate to what extent medical students and surgeons, using this technology in comparison to traditional methods, can quickly and correctly identify patient individual anatomy and pathology and make a surgical decision. Participants are medical students or surgeons of the University of Heidelberg. These will use and evaluate three different operation planning methods for complex liver cases in three groups. Traditional operation planning with sectional views on the monitor will be compared to a 3D-visualization on a monitor and a 3D-visualization in a virtual reality environment with VR-headsets. The correctness and speed of surgical decisions with each of the visualization methods will be evaluated. Furthermore satisfaction, usefulness and potential of the visualization methods will be assessed.

Brief summary in scientific language

Liver resection is the best and in most cases definitive treatment for malignant hepatic lesions. Liver surgery aims to safely remove all affected tissue while minimizing the extent of the resection and loss of functional tissue. To achieve this complex operative interventions in the liver require accurate imaging and visualization of the pathology and the operating field. Sectional imaging (e.g. computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging) is one of the most helpful tools, which aids the surgeon in preparing for the operation, carrying out measurements, visualizing the individual anatomy of the patient, assessing specific risks, taking surgical decisions and thinking through certain operational steps in advance. At the moment radiological imaging data is displayed in stacked sectional views on a standard monitor. Modern methods allow for a better immersive and intuitive visualization of all relevant information (patient information, 3D-model of the organs and radiological imaging data) in a virtual reality environment. Particularly the three-dimensional visualization of imaging data is more intuitive. For this CT-images are segmented and visualized as 3D-models. 3D operation planning in comparison to traditional 2D-methods proved beneficial in complex liver resection with big central tumors in aiding to localize the tumor and planning the resection plane. So far these 3D-models are displayed on 2D-monitors. The present study will evaluate a system which can visualize target structures and the operating field of a patient in a three-dimensional, interactive, intuitive and immersive fashion with a head-mounted display (e.g. Oculus Rift™ (Oculus VR® LLC, Irvine, CA, USA)). For this patient specific radiological imaging data (CT- or MRI-data) will be used to create a 3D-model and integrated into a virtual reality environment with a virtual-reality (VR) headset. The operating field can be visualized realistically. In this study we will evaluate to what extent medical students and surgeons, using this technology in comparison to traditional methods, can quickly and correctly identify patient individual anatomy and pathology and make a surgical decision. This is a prospective, monocentric, randomized controlled study. The participants are medical students and surgeon of the University of Heidelberg. Medical students must have completed the surgical educational module within the medical curriculum of Heidelberg. Participants are stratified according to level of education (students, surgeons) and randomized in one of three arms in a 1:1:1 ratio. Operation planning will be performed either with sectional views on a standard monitor (group “2D, control group), with 3D-models on a standard monitor (group “3D”) or within a virtual reality environment (group “VR). All participants will evaluate three consecutive liver cases with increasing difficulty. A score is determined from the correctness of the answers on an 11-item-checklist assessing liver anatomy and pathology, anomalies and the relation between pathology and anatomy, as well as whether the correct liver resection can be indicated. The time to answer this checklist will be measured. After all liver cases have been evaluated a 14-item-checklist will be filled out assessing satisfaction, usefulness and potential of the visualization methods. All participants receive a standardized recapitulation of liver and vessel anatomy, as well as surgical treatment Options before randomization. After the randomization participants had ample time to familiarize themselves with their visualization method.

Health condition or problem studied

ICD10:
C22.0 - Liver cell carcinoma
ICD10:
C22.1 - Intrahepatic bile duct carcinoma
ICD10:
C22.7 - Other specified carcinomas of liver
Healthy volunteers:
No Entry

Interventions, Observational Groups

Arm 1:
3D-group: In the 3D-group participants evaluate the imaging data as a 3D-model on a standard monitor, anonymized patient information is available on a printed sheet.
Arm 2:
VR-group In the VR-group participants evaluate the imaging data in the virtual reality environment with a head-mounted display (e.g. Oculus Rift™ (Oculus VR® LLC, Irvine, CA, USA). Anonymized patient information is integrated into this environment.
Arm 3:
2D-group (control Group): In the 2D-group participants evaluate the imaging data in sectional views on a standard monitor, anonymized patient information is available on a printed sheet.

Endpoints

Primary outcome:
The primary outcome measure is the difference in the score as measured by an 11-item-checklist with yes/no-, multiple-choice- and single-choice-questions. The checklist measures if relevant liver anatomy and pathology, anomalies and the relation between pathology and anatomy can be assessed and if the decision for a correct liver resection can be made.
Secondary outcome:
Secondary endpoints are the time it took to answer above mentioned checklist, as wel as satisfaction, usefulness and potential of this technology as assessed by an 14-item-checklist with Likert-scales, multiple-choice-questions and and free text. Further secondary endpoint include evaluation of score differences by gender and surgical education level (experienced vs. inexperienced surgeons).

Study Design

Purpose:
Other
Allocation:
Randomized controlled study
Control:
  • Active control (effective treatment of control group)
Phase:
N/A
Study type:
Interventional
Mechanism of allocation concealment:
No Entry
Blinding:
Yes
Assignment:
Parallel
Sequence generation:
No Entry
Who is blinded:
  • Data analyst

Recruitment

Recruitment Status:
Recruiting ongoing
Reason if recruiting stopped or withdrawn:
No Entry

Recruitment Locations

Recruitment countries:
  • Germany
Number of study centers:
Monocenter study
Recruitment location(s):
  • University medical center Chirurgisches Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg

Recruitment period and number of participants

Planned study start date:
2016-08-31
Actual study start date:
No Entry
Planned study completion date:
No Entry
Actual Study Completion Date:
No Entry
Target Sample Size:
150
Final Sample Size:
No Entry

Inclusion Criteria

Sex:
All
Minimum Age:
18 Years
Maximum Age:
no maximum age
Additional Inclusion Criteria:
Medical students in clinical phase of university education, surgeons in general or visceral surgery

Exclusion Criteria

Medical students that have not completed the surgical education module of the medical curriculum of the University of Heidelberg

Addresses

Primary Sponsor

Address:
Chirurgisches Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg
Dr. med. Hannes Kenngott
Im Neuenheimer Feld 110
69120 Heidelberg
Germany
Telephone:
+496221568641
Fax:
No Entry
Contact per E-Mail:
Contact per E-Mail
URL:
http://www.med.uni-heidelberg.de
Investigator Sponsored/Initiated Trial (IST/IIT):
Yes

Contact for Scientific Queries

Address:
Chirurgisches Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg
Dr. med. Hannes Götz Kenngott
Im Neuenheimer Feld 110
69120 Heidelberg
Germany
Telephone:
+496221568641
Fax:
No Entry
Contact per E-Mail:
Contact per E-Mail
URL:
http://www.med.uni-heidelberg.de

Contact for Public Queries

Address:
Chirurgisches Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg
Anas Preukschas
Im Neuenheimer Feld 110
69120 Heidelberg
Germany
Telephone:
+496221568641
Fax:
No Entry
Contact per E-Mail:
Contact per E-Mail
URL:
http://www.med.uni-heidelberg.de

Principal Investigator

Address:
Chirurgisches Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg
Dr. med. Hannes Götz Kenngott
Im Neuenheimer Feld 110
69120 Heidelberg
Germany
Telephone:
+496221568641
Fax:
No Entry
Contact per E-Mail:
Contact per E-Mail
URL:
http://www.med.uni-heidelberg.de

Sources of Monetary or Material Support

Institutional budget, no external funding (budget of sponsor/PI)

Address:
Chirurgisches Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg
Im Neuenheimer Feld 110
69120 Heidelberg
Germany
Telephone:
06221568641
Fax:
06221568645
Contact per E-Mail:
Contact per E-Mail
URL:
https://www.klinikum.uni-heidelberg.de/Chirurgische-Klinik.1010.0.html

Ethics Committee

Address Ethics Committee

Address:
Ethikkommission der Medizinischen Fakultät Heidelberg
Alte Glockengießerei 11/1
69115 Heidelberg
Germany
Telephone:
+49-6221-338220
Fax:
+49-6221-3382222
Contact per E-Mail:
Contact per E-Mail
URL:
No Entry

Vote of leading Ethics Committee

Vote of leading Ethics Committee
Date of ethics committee application:
2016-06-15
Ethics committee number:
S-349/2016
Vote of the Ethics Committee:
Approved
Date of the vote:
2016-07-18

Further identification numbers

Other primary registry ID:
No Entry
EudraCT Number:
No Entry
UTN (Universal Trial Number):
No Entry
EUDAMED Number:
No Entry

IPD - Individual Participant Data

Do you plan to make participant-related data (IPD) available to other researchers in an anonymized form?:
No Entry
IPD Sharing Plan:
No Entry

Study protocol and other study documents

Study protocols:
No Entry
Study abstract:
No Entry
Other study documents:
No Entry
Background literature:
No Entry
Related DRKS studies:
No Entry

Publication of study results

Planned publication:
No Entry
Publikationen/Studienergebnisse:
No Entry
Date of first publication of study results:
No Entry
DRKS entry published for the first time with results:
No Entry

Basic reporting

Basic Reporting / Results tables:
No Entry
Brief summary of results:
No Entry