| Literature DB >> 23705678 |
Dongwen Zhang1, Zhicheng Li, Ken Chen, Jing Xiong, Xuping Zhang, Lei Wang.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted needle steering facilitates the percutaneous renal access (PRA) for their accuracy and consistency over manual operation. However, inaccurate image-robot correspondence and uncertainties in robot parameters make the needle track deviate from the intrarenal target. This paper aims to simplify the image-tracker-robot registration procedure and improves the accuracy of needle alignment for robot assisted ultrasound-guided PRA.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23705678 PMCID: PMC3679870 DOI: 10.1186/1475-925X-12-47
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Eng Online ISSN: 1475-925X Impact factor: 2.819
Figure 1Block diagram of the master–slave experimental set-up for needle intervention.
Figure 2Image-Tracker-Robot registration, the optical tracker acts as an intermediate coupling tool.
Figure 3Coordinate systems of the 5R1P needle operation robot.
Figure 4Optical tracker feedback control for needle alignment.
The nominal parameters of robot
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 2 | 100.00 | −1.57 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 3 | 290.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 4 | 121.00 | −1.57 | 310.00 | 0.00 |
| 5 | 0.00 | 1.57 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 6 | 0.00 | −1.57 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Position of maker (mm): (40.00, 0.00, 160.00) | ||||
Calibrated robot parameter
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.0059 |
| 2 | 99.23 | −1.57 | 0.00 | −0.0179 |
| 3 | 291.77 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.0119 |
| 4 | 119.62 | −1.57 | 310.00 | 0.0024 |
| 5 | 0.00 | 1.57 | 0.00 | −0.0138 |
| 6 | 0.00 | −1.57 | −0.00 | 0.00 |
| Position of maker (mm): (40.32, 0.71, 158.02) | ||||
Figure 5Registration error by two-step method and geometric method.
Figure 6Positioning error of the needle shaft measured by tracker before and after feedback compensation.
Combined disturbance levels in robot parameters
| No. 1 | 1.00 | 0.05 | 1.00 | 0.05 | 1.00 |
| No. 2 | 3.00 | 0.10 | 3.00 | 0.10 | 3.00 |
| No. 3 | 5.00 | 0.15 | 5.00 | 0.15 | 5.00 |
| No. 4 | 10.00 | 0.20 | 10.00 | 0.20 | 10.00 |
| No. 5 | 20.00 | 0.25 | 20.00 | 0.25 | 20.00 |
| No. 6 | 30.00 | 0.30 | 30.00 | 0.30 | 30.00 |
| No. 7 | 40.00 | 0.35 | 40.00 | 0.35 | 40.00 |
| No. 8 | 50.00 | 0.40 | 50.00 | 0.40 | 50.00 |
| No. 9 | 60.00 | 0.45 | 60.00 | 0.45 | 60.00 |
Error magnitudes of optical tracker feedback control
| No. 1 | 67.078 | 0.08 | 0.25 | 5.98 | 6 |
| No. 2 | 123.18 | 0.15 | 0.10 | 4.60 | 7 |
| No. 3 | 175.65 | 0.21 | 0.16 | 8.78 | 9 |
| No. 4 | 223.32 | 0.27 | 0.35 | 6.20 | 10 |
| No. 5 | 263.04 | 0.31 | 0.26 | 3.75 | 15 |
| No. 6 | 299.30 | 0.35 | 0.26 | 2.06 | 20 |
| No. 7 | 334.79 | 0.39 | 0.29 | 4.42 | 30 |
| No. 8 | 357.12 | 0.43 | 0.30 | 5.16 | 39 |
| No. 9 | 380.93 | 0.43 | 0.55 | 7.72 | 50 |
Figure 7Results of robot assisted needle insertion on kidney phantom.
Results of robot assisted needle insertion experiment on kidney
| Position error of alignment (mm) | 0.14 | 0.29 | 0.14 | 0.30 | 0.23 | 0.32 | 0.24 | 0.08 |
| Direction error of alignment (E-4 rad) | 4.88 | 6.08 | 6.28 | 6.00 | 8.01 | 9.44 | 6.78 | 1.65 |
| Position error of insertion (mm) | 2.35 | 2.10 | 2.34 | 2.10 | 1.89 | 2.11 | 2.15 | 0.17 |
| Operation time(s) | 84 | 79 | 81 | 77 | 75 | 80 | 79.33 | 3.14 |