Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2022
Robot-Assisted Needle Insertion for CT-Guided Puncture: Experimental Study with a Phantom and Animals.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Chen Xiangqian, Yan Yadong, Li Ailing, Wang Tianmiao, Wang Yu
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and safety of robotic CT-guided needle insertion in phantom and animal experiments.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A robotic system was developed for CT-guided needle insertion. For the phantom experiment, a specially made phantom containing multiple spherical was used. 15 robotic and manual insertions were conducted, and the accuracy, time, number of needle insertions, and radiation dose were compared between the robotic and manual insertion using Student's t-test. For the animal experiment, 20 robotic needle insertions were attempted toward simulated pulmonary nodules in the swine lung. The accuracy and safety of robotic CT-guided needle insertions were evaluated.
RESULTS: In the phantom experiment, the mean accuracies of manual and robotic insertion were 1.8 ± 0.3 mm and 1.9 ± 0.2 mm. The accuracy of robotic needle insertion had no significant difference with manual needle insertion, but the number of needle insertions and radiation dose of the robotic needle placement significantly decreased compared to manual needle placement. In the animal experiment, the mean accuracy of the robotic needle insertion was 3.8 ± 1.3 mm. The time for the whole needle insertion was 14.4 ± 4.8 min. The whole robotic needle insertions were safe and only one mild pneumothorax occurred.
CONCLUSION: CT-guided robotic needle insertion showed accuracy comparable to manual needle insertion, but the number of needle insertions, confirmatory scans, and radiation exposure had been reduced significantly. In future, we will further apply the robotic system to clinical experiments.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A robotic system was developed for CT-guided needle insertion. For the phantom experiment, a specially made phantom containing multiple spherical was used. 15 robotic and manual insertions were conducted, and the accuracy, time, number of needle insertions, and radiation dose were compared between the robotic and manual insertion using Student's t-test. For the animal experiment, 20 robotic needle insertions were attempted toward simulated pulmonary nodules in the swine lung. The accuracy and safety of robotic CT-guided needle insertions were evaluated.
RESULTS: In the phantom experiment, the mean accuracies of manual and robotic insertion were 1.8 ± 0.3 mm and 1.9 ± 0.2 mm. The accuracy of robotic needle insertion had no significant difference with manual needle insertion, but the number of needle insertions and radiation dose of the robotic needle placement significantly decreased compared to manual needle placement. In the animal experiment, the mean accuracy of the robotic needle insertion was 3.8 ± 1.3 mm. The time for the whole needle insertion was 14.4 ± 4.8 min. The whole robotic needle insertions were safe and only one mild pneumothorax occurred.
CONCLUSION: CT-guided robotic needle insertion showed accuracy comparable to manual needle insertion, but the number of needle insertions, confirmatory scans, and radiation exposure had been reduced significantly. In future, we will further apply the robotic system to clinical experiments.