Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the accuracy of the remote-controlled robotic computed tomography (CT)-guided needle insertion in phantom and animal experiments. Materials and Methods: In a phantom experiment, 18 robotic and manual insertions each were performed with 19-gauge needles by using CT fluoroscopic guidance for the evaluation of the equivalence of accuracy of insertion between the two groups with a 1.0-mm margin. Needle insertion time, CT fluoroscopy time, and radiation exposure were compared by using the Student t test. The animal experiments were approved by the institutional animal care and use committee. In the animal experiment, five robotic insertions each were attempted toward targets in the liver, kidneys, lungs, and hip muscle of three swine by using 19-gauge or 17-gauge needles and by using conventional CT guidance. The feasibility, safety, and accuracy of robotic insertion were evaluated. Results: The mean accuracies of robotic and manual insertion in phantoms were 1.6 and 1.4 mm, respectively. The 95% confidence interval of the mean difference was 20.3 to 0.6 mm. There were no significant differences in needle insertion time, CT fluoroscopy time, or radiation exposure to the phantom between the two methods. Effective dose to the physician during robotic insertion was always 0 μSv, while that during manual insertion was 5.7 μSv on average (P < .001). Robotic insertion was feasible in the animals, with an overall mean accuracy of 3.2 mm and three minor procedure-related complications. Conclusion: Robotic insertion exhibited equivalent accuracy as manual insertion in phantoms, without radiation exposure to the physician. It was also found to be accurate in an in vivo procedure in animals.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)454-461
Number of pages8
JournalRadiology
Volume285
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 1 2017

Fingerprint

Robotics
Needles
Tomography
Fluoroscopy
Animal Care Committees
Physicians
Hip
Swine
Confidence Intervals
Students
Kidney
Safety
Muscles
Lung
Liver
Radiation Exposure

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

@article{f5eaea0908334708a1006c93ddf3876d,
title = "Robotically driven CT-guided needle insertion: Preliminary results in phantom and animal experiments",
abstract = "Purpose: To evaluate the accuracy of the remote-controlled robotic computed tomography (CT)-guided needle insertion in phantom and animal experiments. Materials and Methods: In a phantom experiment, 18 robotic and manual insertions each were performed with 19-gauge needles by using CT fluoroscopic guidance for the evaluation of the equivalence of accuracy of insertion between the two groups with a 1.0-mm margin. Needle insertion time, CT fluoroscopy time, and radiation exposure were compared by using the Student t test. The animal experiments were approved by the institutional animal care and use committee. In the animal experiment, five robotic insertions each were attempted toward targets in the liver, kidneys, lungs, and hip muscle of three swine by using 19-gauge or 17-gauge needles and by using conventional CT guidance. The feasibility, safety, and accuracy of robotic insertion were evaluated. Results: The mean accuracies of robotic and manual insertion in phantoms were 1.6 and 1.4 mm, respectively. The 95{\%} confidence interval of the mean difference was 20.3 to 0.6 mm. There were no significant differences in needle insertion time, CT fluoroscopy time, or radiation exposure to the phantom between the two methods. Effective dose to the physician during robotic insertion was always 0 μSv, while that during manual insertion was 5.7 μSv on average (P < .001). Robotic insertion was feasible in the animals, with an overall mean accuracy of 3.2 mm and three minor procedure-related complications. Conclusion: Robotic insertion exhibited equivalent accuracy as manual insertion in phantoms, without radiation exposure to the physician. It was also found to be accurate in an in vivo procedure in animals.",
author = "Takao Hiraki and Tetsushi Kamegawa and Takayuki Matsuno and Jun Sakurai and Yasuzo Kirita and Ryutaro Matsuura and Takuya Yamaguchi and Takanori Sasaki and Toshiharu Mitsuhashi and Toshiyuki Komaki and Yoshihisa Masaoka and Yusuke Matsui and Hiroyasu Fujiwara and Toshihiro Iguchi and Hideo Gobara and Susumu Kanazawa",
year = "2017",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1148/radiol.2017162856",
language = "English",
volume = "285",
pages = "454--461",
journal = "Radiology",
issn = "0033-8419",
publisher = "Radiological Society of North America Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Robotically driven CT-guided needle insertion

T2 - Preliminary results in phantom and animal experiments

AU - Hiraki, Takao

AU - Kamegawa, Tetsushi

AU - Matsuno, Takayuki

AU - Sakurai, Jun

AU - Kirita, Yasuzo

AU - Matsuura, Ryutaro

AU - Yamaguchi, Takuya

AU - Sasaki, Takanori

AU - Mitsuhashi, Toshiharu

AU - Komaki, Toshiyuki

AU - Masaoka, Yoshihisa

AU - Matsui, Yusuke

AU - Fujiwara, Hiroyasu

AU - Iguchi, Toshihiro

AU - Gobara, Hideo

AU - Kanazawa, Susumu

PY - 2017/11/1

Y1 - 2017/11/1

N2 - Purpose: To evaluate the accuracy of the remote-controlled robotic computed tomography (CT)-guided needle insertion in phantom and animal experiments. Materials and Methods: In a phantom experiment, 18 robotic and manual insertions each were performed with 19-gauge needles by using CT fluoroscopic guidance for the evaluation of the equivalence of accuracy of insertion between the two groups with a 1.0-mm margin. Needle insertion time, CT fluoroscopy time, and radiation exposure were compared by using the Student t test. The animal experiments were approved by the institutional animal care and use committee. In the animal experiment, five robotic insertions each were attempted toward targets in the liver, kidneys, lungs, and hip muscle of three swine by using 19-gauge or 17-gauge needles and by using conventional CT guidance. The feasibility, safety, and accuracy of robotic insertion were evaluated. Results: The mean accuracies of robotic and manual insertion in phantoms were 1.6 and 1.4 mm, respectively. The 95% confidence interval of the mean difference was 20.3 to 0.6 mm. There were no significant differences in needle insertion time, CT fluoroscopy time, or radiation exposure to the phantom between the two methods. Effective dose to the physician during robotic insertion was always 0 μSv, while that during manual insertion was 5.7 μSv on average (P < .001). Robotic insertion was feasible in the animals, with an overall mean accuracy of 3.2 mm and three minor procedure-related complications. Conclusion: Robotic insertion exhibited equivalent accuracy as manual insertion in phantoms, without radiation exposure to the physician. It was also found to be accurate in an in vivo procedure in animals.

AB - Purpose: To evaluate the accuracy of the remote-controlled robotic computed tomography (CT)-guided needle insertion in phantom and animal experiments. Materials and Methods: In a phantom experiment, 18 robotic and manual insertions each were performed with 19-gauge needles by using CT fluoroscopic guidance for the evaluation of the equivalence of accuracy of insertion between the two groups with a 1.0-mm margin. Needle insertion time, CT fluoroscopy time, and radiation exposure were compared by using the Student t test. The animal experiments were approved by the institutional animal care and use committee. In the animal experiment, five robotic insertions each were attempted toward targets in the liver, kidneys, lungs, and hip muscle of three swine by using 19-gauge or 17-gauge needles and by using conventional CT guidance. The feasibility, safety, and accuracy of robotic insertion were evaluated. Results: The mean accuracies of robotic and manual insertion in phantoms were 1.6 and 1.4 mm, respectively. The 95% confidence interval of the mean difference was 20.3 to 0.6 mm. There were no significant differences in needle insertion time, CT fluoroscopy time, or radiation exposure to the phantom between the two methods. Effective dose to the physician during robotic insertion was always 0 μSv, while that during manual insertion was 5.7 μSv on average (P < .001). Robotic insertion was feasible in the animals, with an overall mean accuracy of 3.2 mm and three minor procedure-related complications. Conclusion: Robotic insertion exhibited equivalent accuracy as manual insertion in phantoms, without radiation exposure to the physician. It was also found to be accurate in an in vivo procedure in animals.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85032188021&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85032188021&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1148/radiol.2017162856

DO - 10.1148/radiol.2017162856

M3 - Article

C2 - 28604237

AN - SCOPUS:85032188021

VL - 285

SP - 454

EP - 461

JO - Radiology

JF - Radiology

SN - 0033-8419

IS - 2

ER -