The comparison of the process of manual and robotic positioning of the electrode performing radiofrequency ablation under the control of a surgical navigation system

Abstract

this study is aimed at the comparison of the process of manual and robotic positioning of the electrode performing radiofrequency ablation under the control of a surgical navigation system. the main hypothesis of this experiment was that the use of a collaborative manipulator (KUKA iiwa) will allow to position the active part of the electrode relative to the center of the tumor more accurately and from the first attempt. We also monitor the stability of the electrode′s velocity during insertion and consider some advantages in ergonomics using the robotic manipulator. We use three more criteria to compare the surgeon's and robotic performance, unlike other studies, where only the target point's accuracy criterion is observed. the main idea is to examine the movement parameters of the electrode that can lead to potential patient trauma. Sphere-shaped tumor phantoms measuring 8 mm in diameter were filled with contrast and inserted in bovine livers. 10 livers were used for the robotic experiment and an equal quantity for manual surgery. the livers were encased in silicone phantoms designed to imitate the liver position in a real patient's abdominal cavity. Analysis of CT data gave the opportunity to find the entry and the target point for each tumor phantom. this data was loaded into a surgical navigation system that was used to track and record the position of the Rf-electrode during the operation for further analysis. the standard deviation of points from the programmed linear trajectory totaled in the average 0.3 mm for the robotic experiment and 2.33 mm for the manual operation with a maximum deviation of 0.55 mm and 7.99 mm respectively. Standard deviation from the target point was 2.69 mm for the collaborative method and 2.49 mm for the manual method. The average velocity was 2.97 mm/s for the manipulator and 3.12 mm/s for the manual method, but the standard deviation of the velocity relative to the value of the average velocity was 0.66 mm/s and 3.05 mm/s respectively. Thus, in two criteria out of three, the manipulator is superior to the surgeon, and equality is established in one. Surgeons also noticed advantages in ergonomics performing the procedure using the manipulator. this experiment was produced as part of the work on the developing of a robotic multifunctional surgical complex. We can confirm the potential advantages of using collaborative robotic manipulators for minimally invasive surgery in case of practice for cancer treatment. Minimally invasive surgery is becoming a standard in the treatment of cancer of internal organs 1-6. The main advantages are considered to be short hospitalization periods and a reduction in the postoperative recovery time. Modern studies also show that there are groups of patients at particular risk (diabetic, with an increased body

Applications of Healthcare Robots in Combating the COVID-19 Pandemic

“…This robot is equipped with computational imaging capabilities and makes use of artificial intelligence (AI) and deep learning to make a diagnosis based on all available data [ 61 ]. It can also be used to perform X-rays and MRIs [ 62 ]. A radiologist robot is very advantageous, as it reduces the risk of healthcare professionals by preventing them from coming in contact with the harmful radiations emitted during the imaging cycles [ 63 ].…”

Low-dose CT fluoroscopy–guided interventional minimally invasive robot

“…The teleoperation robot system was securely positioned near the CT scanning table, ensuring that the mechanical arm remained relatively fixed [ [18] , [19] , [20] , [21] , [22] ]. Consequently, it was strictly prohibited to move the scanning table during fluoroscopy-guided puncture procedures.…”

Assessment of experimental OpenCV tracking algorithms for ultrasound videos

“…In recent years, minimally invasive surgery has become the standard in cancer treatment 11 . It reduces the period of hospitalization and postoperative recovery.…”