M A Tavallaei1, M K Lavdas2, D Gelman2, M Drangova2. 1. Imaging Research Laboratories, Robarts Research Institute, Western University, London, ON, N6A 5B9, Canada. mtavalla@uwo.ca. 2. Imaging Research Laboratories, Robarts Research Institute, Western University, London, ON, N6A 5B9, Canada.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To facilitate MRI-guided catheterization procedures, we present an MRI-compatible remote catheter navigation system that allows remote navigation of steerable catheters with 3 degrees of freedom. METHODS: The system consists of a user interface (master), a robot (slave), and an ultrasonic motor control servomechanism. The interventionalist applies conventional motions (axial, radial and plunger manipulations) on an input catheter in the master unit; this user input is measured and used by the servomechanism to control a compact catheter manipulating robot, such that it replicates the interventionalist's input motion on the patient catheter. The performance of the system was evaluated in terms of MRI compatibility (SNR and artifact), feasibility of remote navigation under real-time MRI guidance, and motion replication accuracy. RESULTS: Real-time MRI experiments demonstrated that catheter was successfully navigated remotely to desired target references in all 3 degrees of freedom. The system had an absolute value error of [Formula: see text]1 mm in axial catheter motion replication over 30 mm of travel and [Formula: see text] for radial catheter motion replication over [Formula: see text]. The worst case SNR drop was observed to be [Formula: see text]3 %; the robot did not introduce any artifacts in the MR images. CONCLUSION: An MRI-compatible compact remote catheter navigation system has been developed that allows remote navigation of steerable catheters with 3 degrees of freedom. The proposed system allows for safe and accurate remote catheter navigation, within conventional closed-bore scanners, without degrading MR image quality.
PURPOSE: To facilitate MRI-guided catheterization procedures, we present an MRI-compatible remote catheter navigation system that allows remote navigation of steerable catheters with 3 degrees of freedom. METHODS: The system consists of a user interface (master), a robot (slave), and an ultrasonic motor control servomechanism. The interventionalist applies conventional motions (axial, radial and plunger manipulations) on an input catheter in the master unit; this user input is measured and used by the servomechanism to control a compact catheter manipulating robot, such that it replicates the interventionalist's input motion on the patient catheter. The performance of the system was evaluated in terms of MRI compatibility (SNR and artifact), feasibility of remote navigation under real-time MRI guidance, and motion replication accuracy. RESULTS: Real-time MRI experiments demonstrated that catheter was successfully navigated remotely to desired target references in all 3 degrees of freedom. The system had an absolute value error of [Formula: see text]1 mm in axial catheter motion replication over 30 mm of travel and [Formula: see text] for radial catheter motion replication over [Formula: see text]. The worst case SNR drop was observed to be [Formula: see text]3 %; the robot did not introduce any artifacts in the MR images. CONCLUSION: An MRI-compatible compact remote catheter navigation system has been developed that allows remote navigation of steerable catheters with 3 degrees of freedom. The proposed system allows for safe and accurate remote catheter navigation, within conventional closed-bore scanners, without degrading MR image quality.
Authors: Mohammad Ali Tavallaei; Daniel Gelman; Michael Konstantine Lavdas; Allan C Skanes; Douglas L Jones; Jeffrey S Bax; Maria Drangova Journal: Int J Med Robot Date: 2015-11-03 Impact factor: 2.547
Authors: K Perisinakis; J Damilakis; N Theocharopoulos; E Manios; P Vardas; N Gourtsoyiannis Journal: Circulation Date: 2001-07-03 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Ejaz M Khan; William Frumkin; G Andre Ng; Suresh Neelagaru; Freddy M Abi-Samra; Jay Lee; Michael Giudici; Douglas Gohn; Roger A Winkle; Jonathan Sussman; Bradley P Knight; Adam Berman; Hugh Calkins Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2013-05-01 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Mitchell N Faddis; Jane Chen; Judy Osborn; Michael Talcott; Michael E Cain; Bruce D Lindsay Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2003-12-03 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Mohammad I Zia; Nilesh R Ghugre; Kim A Connelly; Bradley H Strauss; John D Sparkes; Alexander J Dick; Graham A Wright Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2012-06-28 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: James L Harrison; Henrik K Jensen; Sarah A Peel; Amedeo Chiribiri; Anne K Grøndal; Lars Ø Bloch; Steen F Pedersen; Jacob F Bentzon; Christoph Kolbitsch; Rashed Karim; Steven E Williams; Nick W Linton; Kawal S Rhode; Jaswinder Gill; Michael Cooklin; C A Rinaldi; Matthew Wright; Won Y Kim; Tobias Schaeffter; Reza S Razavi; Mark D O'Neill Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2014-01-12 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Adrienne E Campbell-Washburn; Mohammad A Tavallaei; Mihaela Pop; Elena K Grant; Henry Chubb; Kawal Rhode; Graham A Wright Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2017-05-11 Impact factor: 4.813