Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T02:18:28.944Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Toward lean minimally invasive robotic surgery

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2009

Matteo Zoppi ,
Mohammed Aamir Khan ,
Felix Schäfer  and
Rezia Molfino
Matteo Zoppi
Affiliation:
University of Genoa, Deptartment of Mechanics and Machine Design, PMAR Robot Design Research Group, Genoa, Italy
Mohammed Aamir Khan
Affiliation:
University of Genoa, Deptartment of Mechanics and Machine Design, PMAR Robot Design Research Group, Genoa, Italy
Felix Schäfer
Affiliation:
University of Genoa, Deptartment of Mechanics and Machine Design, PMAR Robot Design Research Group, Genoa, Italy
Rezia Molfino*
Affiliation:
University of Genoa, Deptartment of Mechanics and Machine Design, PMAR Robot Design Research Group, Genoa, Italy
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Developed minimally invasive surgical (MIS) robots are large multi-arm, multipurpose systems requiring significant investments that limit their availability in hospitals. A larger distribution of MIS robots with benefit for patients might be achieved improving their modularity and scalability so that smaller hospitals or medical centers could decide for a simpler and lower cost setup for a limited number of treatments only, while centers with higher funding could have more systems dedicated to different classes of operations. In line with this statement the paper proposes the paradigm of lean MIS system comprising a scalable set of modular, agile, small size single-instrument robots with limited life cycle cost. Miniaturization of instruments can further reduce invasiveness of procedures and one promising research direction is needle laparoscopic surgery, which can be applied to classes of operations on small regions requiring small force interaction with the patient. In the paper the development of a lean single-instrument manipulator for needlescopic surgery is presented and a new master concept for accurate restitution of surgical force proposed and discussed.

Keywords

Surgical roboticsMinimally invasive surgeryNeedlescopic surgery
Type
Article
Information
Robotica , Volume 28 , Special Issue 2: Surgical Robotics: System Development, Application Study and Performance Analysis , March 2010 , pp. 185 - 197
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Cepolina, F., Challacombe, B. and Michelini, R. C., “Trends in robotic surgery,” Int. J. Endurol. 19 (8), 940–951 (2005).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2. Merlet, J.-P., Parallel Robots (Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2000) pp. 31–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Merlet, J.-P., “Miniature In-Parallel Positioning System Mips for Minimally Invasive Surgery,” Proceedings of the World Congress on Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Nice, France (Sep. 14–19, 1997) pp. 141–147.Google Scholar
4. Darzi, A. and Mackay, S., “Recent advances in minimal access surgery,” Int. Br. Med. J. 324 (7328), 31–34 (2002).Google ScholarPubMed
5. Asao, T., Kuwano, H. and Mochiki, E., “Laparoscopic surgery update for gastrointestinal malignancy,” Int. J. Gastroenterol. 39 (4), 309–318 (2004).Google ScholarPubMed
6. Guthart, G. S. and Salisbury, J. K. Jr., “The Intuitive™ Telesurgery System: Overview and Application. IEEE International Conference Robotics and Automation ICRA00, vol. 1 (San Francisco, CA, Apr. 24–28, 2000) pp. 618–621.Google Scholar
7. Cepolina, F. and Michelini, R. C., “Review of robotic fixtures for low-invasivenss surgery,” Int. J. Med. Robot. Comput. Assist. Surg. 1 (1), 43–63 (2004).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8. Lum, M. J. H., Trimble, D., Rosen, J., Fodero, K., King, H. H., Sankaranarayanan, G., Dosher, J., Leuschke, R., Martin-Anderson, B., Sinanan, M. N. and Hannaford, B., “Multidisciplinary Approach for Developing a New Minimally Invasive Surgical Robotic System,” IEEE/RAS-EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics BioRob2006, Pisa, Italy (Feb. 20–22, 2006).Google Scholar
9. Rosen, J. and Hannaford, B., “Doc at a distance,” IEEE Spectr. 43 (10), 34–39 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Çavuşoǧlu, M. C., Cohn, M., Tendick, F. and Sastry, S. S., “Laparoscopic telesurgical workstation,” Int. J. IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 15 (4), 728–739 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Arata, J., Mitushi, M., Shin'ichi, W., Tanaka, K., Yoshizawa, T. and Hashizume, M., “Development of a Dexterous Minimally-Invasive Surgical System with Augmented Force Feedback Capability,” IEEE/RSJ International Conference Intelligent Robots and Systems IROS2005, Japan (Aug. 2–6, 2005) pp. 3207–3212.Google Scholar
12. Ortmaier, T., Weiss, H. and Falk, V., “Design requirements for a new robot for minimally invasive surgery,” Int. J. Ind. Robot. 31 (6), 493–498 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Madhani, A. J., Niemeyer, G. and Salisbury, J. K. Jr., “The Black Falcon: A Teleoperated Surgical Instrument for Minimally Invasive Surgery,” IEEE/RSJ International Conference Intelligent Robots and Systems, Victoria, Canada (Oct. 13–17, 1998) pp. 936–944.Google Scholar
14. Mamazza, J., Schlachta, C. M., Seshadri, P. A., Cadeddu, M. O. and Poulin, E. C., “Needlescopic surgery,” Int. J. Surg. Endosc. 15 (10), 1208–1212 (2001).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15. Kong, X. and Gosselin, C. M., Type Synthesis of Parallel Mechanisms, Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics, vol. 33 (2007).Google Scholar
16. Zoppi, M., Zlatanov, D. and Molfino, R., “On the velocity analysis of interconnected chains mechanisms,” Int. J. Mech. Mach. Theory 41 (11), 1346–1358 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Zoppi, M., Sieklicki, W. and Molfino, R., “Design of a micro robotic wrist for needle laparoscopic surgery,” ASME J. Mech. Des. 130 (10), 102306-1–102306-8 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Salisbury, J. K. Jr., “The heart of microsurgery,” ASME Mech. Eng. Mag. 120 (12), 47–51 (1998).Google Scholar
19. Noma, H., Miyasato, T. and Kishino, F., A Palmtop Display for Dexterous Manipulation with Haptic Sensation (ACM, New York, 1996) pp. 126–137.Google Scholar
20. Faraz, A. and Payandeh, S., Engineering Approaches to Mechanical and Robotic Design for Minimally Invasive Surgeries, Springer International Series in Engineering and Computer Science (Kluwer Academic Publisher, 2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21. Ferzli, G. S. and Fingerhut, A., “Trocar placement for laparoscopic abdominal procedures: A simple standardized method,” Int. J. Am. College Surg. 198 (1), 163–173 (2004).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22. Cavusoglu, M. C., Villanueva, I. and Tendick, F., “Workspace Analysis of Robotic Manipulators for a Teleoperated Suturing Task,” International Conference IEEE/RSJ:IROS, Hawaii, (2001).Google Scholar
23. Lum, M. J. H., Rosen, J., Hannaford, B. and Sinanan, M. N., “Optimization of a spherical mechanism for a minimally invasive surgical robot: Theoretical and exp. approaches,” Int. J. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 53 (7), 1140–1145 (2006).Google Scholar
24. Fumo, M. J., Hemal, A. K. and Menon, M., “Robotic Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy” In Endourological Management of Urogenital Carcinoma (Naito, S., Hirao, Y. and Terachil, T., eds.) (Springer, Tokyo, 2006) pp. 175–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25. Luo, J., Cai, Z. and Huang, Y., “Clinical experience of needle-laparoscopic cholecystectomy,” Int. J. Surg. Pract. 4 (1), 17–19 (2000).Google Scholar
26. Lee, K. W., Poon, C. M., Leung, K. F., Lee, D. W. H. and Ko, C. W., “Two-port needlescopic cholecystectomy: Prospective study of 100 cases,” Int. J. Hong Kong Med. J. 11, 30–35 (2005).Google ScholarPubMed
27. Tagaya, N., Kyu, R. and Kubota, K., “Splenectomy using a completely needlescopic procedure: Report of three cases,” Int. J. Laparoendoscopic Adv. Surg. Techn. 12 (3), 213–216 (2002).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
28. Brown, J. D., Rosen, J., Chang, L., Sinanan, M. N. and Hannaford, B., “Quantifying surgeon grasping mechanics in laparoscopy using the blue dragon system,” Studies in Health Technology and Informatics – Medicine Meets Virtual Reality, Newport Beach, CA (January 2004).Google Scholar
29. Zoppi, M., Zlatanov, D. and Gosselin, C. M., “Analytical kinematics models and special geometries of a class of 4-dof parallel mechanisms,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 21 (6), 1046–1055 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30. Khan, M. A., Zoppi, M. and Molfino, R., “4dof Parallel Architecture for Laparoscopic Surgery,” In Advances in Robot Kinematics ARK 2008 (Lenarcic, J., ed.) (Kluwer, Batz-sur-Mer, France, Jun. 22–26, 2008) pp. 119–126.Google Scholar
31. Zhang, X. and Nelson, C. A., “Kinematic analysis and optimization of a novel robot for surgical tool manipulation.” ASME J. Med. Devices 2 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32. McAffee, D. A. and Fiorini, P., “Hand Controller Design Requirements and Performance Issues in Telerobotics,” International Conference on Advanced Robotics ICAR91, vol. 1, Pisa, Italy (Jun. 19–22, 1991) pp. 186–192.Google Scholar
33. Bonev, I. A., Zlatanov, D. and Gosselin, C. M., “Advantages of the Modified Euler Angles in the Design and Control of PKMs.” In Development Methods and Application Experience of Parallel Kinematics. (Neugebauer, R., ed.) (Proceedings of the 3rd Chemnitz Parallel Kinematics Seminar PKS2002, vol. 16, Chemnitz, Germany, Apr. 23–25, 2002) pp. 429–440.Google Scholar
34. Tan, H. Z., Pang, X. D. and Durlach, N. I., “Manual Resolution of Length, Force and Compliance,” International ASME 1992 Winter Annual Meeting, vol. 42, Anaheim, CA (Nov. 1992) pp. 440. 13–18.Google Scholar