Julien Ghelfi1, Alexandre Moreau-Gaudry2,3,4,5, Nikolai Hungr6, Céline Fouard6, Baptiste Véron6, Maud Medici4,7,8, Emilie Chipon4,7,8, Philippe Cinquin6, Ivan Bricault9. 1. Clinique Universitaire de Radiologie et Imagerie Médicale, CHU de Grenoble, BP 217, 38043, Grenoble Cedex 09, France. JGhelfi@chu-grenoble.fr. 2. TIMC-IMAG, Univ. Grenoble-Alpes, 38000, Grenoble, France. 3. TIMC-IMAG, CNRS, 38000, Grenoble, France. 4. Inserm CIC 1406, 38000, Grenoble, France. 5. Pole Sante Publique, CHU Grenoble-Alpes, 38000, Grenoble, France. 6. Laboratoire TIMC-IMAG (UMR CNRS 5525) - Équipe GMCAO, Faculté de Médecine - Pavillon Taillefer, 38706, La Tronche Cedex, France. 7. CIC 1406, Univ. Grenoble-Alpes, 38000, Grenoble, France. 8. Pole Recherche, CHU Grenoble-Alpes, 38000, Grenoble, France. 9. Clinique Universitaire de Radiologie et Imagerie Médicale, CHU de Grenoble, BP 217, 38043, Grenoble Cedex 09, France.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy of Light Puncture Robot (LPR) as a patient-mounted robot, in positioning a sham needle under MRI guidance for abdominal percutaneous interventions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This monocentric, prospective and non-controlled study was approved by the ethics review board. The study evaluated the accuracy of LPR V3 to achieve a virtual puncture in 20 healthy volunteers. Three trajectories were tried on each volunteer, under 3-T MRI guidance. RESULTS: Accuracy under 5 mm in attaining a 10 cm-deep target was reached in 72% of attempts after 2 robot motions with a median error of 4.1 mm [2.1; 5.1]. Median procedure time for one trajectory was 12.9 min [10.2; 18.0] and median installation time was 9.0 min [6.0; 13.0]. CONCLUSION: LPR accuracy in the deployment of a sham needle inside the MRI tunnel and its setup time are promising. Further studies need to be conducted to confirm these results before clinical trials.
PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy of Light Puncture Robot (LPR) as a patient-mounted robot, in positioning a sham needle under MRI guidance for abdominal percutaneous interventions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This monocentric, prospective and non-controlled study was approved by the ethics review board. The study evaluated the accuracy of LPR V3 to achieve a virtual puncture in 20 healthy volunteers. Three trajectories were tried on each volunteer, under 3-T MRI guidance. RESULTS: Accuracy under 5 mm in attaining a 10 cm-deep target was reached in 72% of attempts after 2 robot motions with a median error of 4.1 mm [2.1; 5.1]. Median procedure time for one trajectory was 12.9 min [10.2; 18.0] and median installation time was 9.0 min [6.0; 13.0]. CONCLUSION: LPR accuracy in the deployment of a sham needle inside the MRI tunnel and its setup time are promising. Further studies need to be conducted to confirm these results before clinical trials.
Authors: Gang Li; Niravkumar A Patel; Yanzhou Wang; Charles Dumoulin; Wolfgang Loew; Olivia Loparo; Katherine Schneider; Karun Sharma; Kevin Cleary; Jan Fritz; Iulian Iordachita Journal: IEEE Robot Autom Lett Date: 2020-07-07
Authors: Gang Li; Niravkumar A Patel; Karun Sharma; Reza Monfaredi; Charles Dumoulin; Jan Fritz; Iulian Iordachita; Kevin Cleary Journal: IEEE Trans Med Robot Bionics Date: 2020-10-13
Authors: Hao Su; Ka-Wai Kwok; Kevin Cleary; Iulian Iordachita; M Cenk Cavusoglu; Jaydev P Desai; Gregory S Fischer Journal: Proc IEEE Inst Electr Electron Eng Date: 2022-05-03 Impact factor: 14.910
Authors: Niravkumar Patel; Jiawen Yan; Gang Li; Reza Monfaredi; Lukasz Priba; Helen Donald-Simpson; Joyce Joy; Andrew Dennison; Andreas Melzer; Karun Sharma; Iulian Iordachita; Kevin Cleary Journal: Front Robot AI Date: 2021-05-10