PURPOSE: To develop and assess a needle-guiding manipulator for MRI-guided therapy that allows a physician to freely select the needle insertion path while maintaining remote center of motion (RCM) at the tumor site. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The manipulator consists of a three-degrees-of-freedom (DOF) base stage and passive needle holder with unconstrained two-DOF rotation. The synergistic control keeps the Virtual RCM at the preplanned target using encoder outputs from the needle holder as input to motorize the base stage. RESULTS: The manipulator assists in searching for an optimal needle insertion path which is a complex and time-consuming task in MRI-guided ablation therapy for liver tumors. The assessment study showed that accuracy of keeping the virtual RCM to predefined position is 3.0 mm. In a phantom test, the physicians found the needle insertion path faster with than without the manipulator (number of physicians = 3, P = 0.001). However, the alignment time with the virtual RCM was not shorter when imaging time for planning were considered. CONCLUSION: The study indicated that the robot holds promise as a tool for accurately and interactively selecting the optimal needle insertion path in liver ablation therapy guided by open-configuration MRI.
PURPOSE: To develop and assess a needle-guiding manipulator for MRI-guided therapy that allows a physician to freely select the needle insertion path while maintaining remote center of motion (RCM) at the tumor site. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The manipulator consists of a three-degrees-of-freedom (DOF) base stage and passive needle holder with unconstrained two-DOF rotation. The synergistic control keeps the Virtual RCM at the preplanned target using encoder outputs from the needle holder as input to motorize the base stage. RESULTS: The manipulator assists in searching for an optimal needle insertion path which is a complex and time-consuming task in MRI-guided ablation therapy for liver tumors. The assessment study showed that accuracy of keeping the virtual RCM to predefined position is 3.0 mm. In a phantom test, the physicians found the needle insertion path faster with than without the manipulator (number of physicians = 3, P = 0.001). However, the alignment time with the virtual RCM was not shorter when imaging time for planning were considered. CONCLUSION: The study indicated that the robot holds promise as a tool for accurately and interactively selecting the optimal needle insertion path in liver ablation therapy guided by open-configuration MRI.
Authors: S G Silverman; K Tuncali; D F Adams; E vanSonnenberg; K H Zou; D F Kacher; P R Morrison; F A Jolesz Journal: Radiology Date: 2000-12 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Robert C Susil; Axel Krieger; J Andrew Derbyshire; Attila Tanacs; Louis L Whitcomb; Gabor Fichtinger; Ergin Atalar Journal: Radiology Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Andreas H Mahnken; Arno Buecker; Elmar Spuentrup; Gabriele A Krombach; Dietrich Henzler; Rolf W Günther; Josef Tacke Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Stefan O R Pfleiderer; Jürgen R Reichenbach; Tarek Azhari; Christiane Marx; Ansgar Malich; Achim Schneider; Jörg Vagner; Harald Fischer; Werner A Kaiser Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Jean Palussière; Rares Salomir; Brigitte Le Bail; Rabia Fawaz; Bruno Quesson; Nicolas Grenier; Chrit T W Moonen Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Junichi Tokuda; Laurent Chauvin; Brian Ninni; Takahisa Kato; Franklin King; Kemal Tuncali; Nobuhiko Hata Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2018-04-13 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Junichi Tokuda; Gregory S Fischer; Simon P DiMaio; David G Gobbi; Csaba Csoma; Philip W Mewes; Gabor Fichtinger; Clare M Tempany; Nobuhiko Hata Journal: Comput Med Imaging Graph Date: 2009-08-20 Impact factor: 4.790