PURPOSE: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an emerging modality for interventional radiology, giving clinicians another tool for minimally invasive image-guided interventional procedures. Difficulties associated with endovascular catheter navigation using MRI guidance led to the development of a magnetically steerable catheter. The focus of this study was to mechanically characterize deflections of two different prototypes of the magnetically steerable catheter in vitro to better understand their efficacy. METHODS: A mathematical model for deflection of the magnetically steerable catheter is formulated based on the principle that at equilibrium the mechanical and magnetic torques are equal to each other. Furthermore, two different image based methods for empirically measuring the catheter deflection angle are presented. The first, referred to as the absolute tip method, measures the angle of the line that is tangential to the catheter tip. The second, referred to the base to tip method, is an approximation that is used when it is not possible to measure the angle of the tangent line. Optical images of the catheter deflection are analyzed using the absolute tip method to quantitatively validate the predicted deflections from the mathematical model. Optical images of the catheter deflection are also analyzed using the base to tip method to quantitatively determine the differences between the absolute tip and base to tip methods. Finally, the optical images are compared to MR images using the base to tip method to determine the accuracy of measuring the catheter deflection using MR. RESULTS: The optical catheter deflection angles measured for both catheter prototypes using the absolute tip method fit very well to the mathematical model (R(2) = 0.91 and 0.86 for each prototype, respectively). It was found that the angles measured using the base to tip method were consistently smaller than those measured using the absolute tip method. The deflection angles measured using optical data did not demonstrate a significant difference from the angles measured using MR image data when compared using the base to tip method. CONCLUSIONS: This study validates the theoretical description of the magnetically steerable catheter, while also giving insight into different methods and modalities for measuring the deflection angles of the prototype catheters. These results can be used to mechanically model future iterations of the design. Quantifying the difference between the different methods for measuring catheter deflection will be important when making deflection measurements in future studies. Finally, MR images can be used to reliably measure deflection angles since there is no significant difference between the MR and optical measurements.
PURPOSE: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an emerging modality for interventional radiology, giving clinicians another tool for minimally invasive image-guided interventional procedures. Difficulties associated with endovascular catheter navigation using MRI guidance led to the development of a magnetically steerable catheter. The focus of this study was to mechanically characterize deflections of two different prototypes of the magnetically steerable catheter in vitro to better understand their efficacy. METHODS: A mathematical model for deflection of the magnetically steerable catheter is formulated based on the principle that at equilibrium the mechanical and magnetic torques are equal to each other. Furthermore, two different image based methods for empirically measuring the catheter deflection angle are presented. The first, referred to as the absolute tip method, measures the angle of the line that is tangential to the catheter tip. The second, referred to the base to tip method, is an approximation that is used when it is not possible to measure the angle of the tangent line. Optical images of the catheter deflection are analyzed using the absolute tip method to quantitatively validate the predicted deflections from the mathematical model. Optical images of the catheter deflection are also analyzed using the base to tip method to quantitatively determine the differences between the absolute tip and base to tip methods. Finally, the optical images are compared to MR images using the base to tip method to determine the accuracy of measuring the catheter deflection using MR. RESULTS: The optical catheter deflection angles measured for both catheter prototypes using the absolute tip method fit very well to the mathematical model (R(2) = 0.91 and 0.86 for each prototype, respectively). It was found that the angles measured using the base to tip method were consistently smaller than those measured using the absolute tip method. The deflection angles measured using optical data did not demonstrate a significant difference from the angles measured using MR image data when compared using the base to tip method. CONCLUSIONS: This study validates the theoretical description of the magnetically steerable catheter, while also giving insight into different methods and modalities for measuring the deflection angles of the prototype catheters. These results can be used to mechanically model future iterations of the design. Quantifying the difference between the different methods for measuring catheter deflection will be important when making deflection measurements in future studies. Finally, MR images can be used to reliably measure deflection angles since there is no significant difference between the MR and optical measurements.
Authors: B L Daniel; R L Birdwell; K Butts; K W Nowels; D M Ikeda; S G Heiss; C R Cooper; S S Jeffrey; F M Dirbas; R J Herfkens Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2001-06 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Michael S Breen; Tanya L Lancaster; Roee S Lazebnik; Sherif G Nour; Jonathan S Lewin; David L Wilson Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2003-07 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Stuart N Hoffman; John A TenBrook; Michael P Wolf; Stephen G Pauker; Deeb N Salem; John B Wong Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2003-04-16 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Reza Razavi; Derek L G Hill; Stephen F Keevil; Marc E Miquel; Vivek Muthurangu; Sanjeet Hegde; Kawal Rhode; Michael Barnett; Joop van Vaals; David J Hawkes; Edward Baker Journal: Lancet Date: 2003-12-06 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Mark W Wilson; Robert K Kerlan; Nicholas A Fidelman; Alan P Venook; Jeanne M LaBerge; Joy Koda; Roy L Gordon Journal: Radiology Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Parham Moftakhar; Prasheel Lillaney; Aaron D Losey; Daniel L Cooke; Alastair J Martin; Bradford R H Thorne; Ronald L Arenson; Maythem Saeed; Mark W Wilson; Steven W Hetts Journal: Radiology Date: 2015-06-01 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Prasheel V Lillaney; Jeffrey K Yang; Aaron D Losey; Alastair J Martin; Daniel L Cooke; Bradford R H Thorne; David C Barry; Andrew Chu; Carol Stillson; Loi Do; Ronald L Arenson; Maythem Saeed; Mark W Wilson; Steven W Hetts Journal: Radiology Date: 2016-03-28 Impact factor: 11.105