Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32100177›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2020

Design of an end-effector for robot-assisted ultrasound-guided breast biopsies.

Marcel K Welleweerd, Françoise J Siepel, Vincent Groenhuis, Jeroen Veltman, Stefano Stramigioli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Time-aware deep neural networks for needle tip localization in 2D ultrasound.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Marcel K WelleweerdRobotics and Mechatronics, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands. m.k.welleweerd@utwente.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2537-0775
Françoise J SiepelRobotics and Mechatronics, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.
Vincent GroenhuisRobotics and Mechatronics, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.
Jeroen VeltmanZiekenhuisgroep Twente, Almelo, The Netherlands.
Stefano StramigioliRobotics and Mechatronics, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.

Funding

H2020 European Research Council 688188
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe biopsy procedure is an important phase in breast cancer diagnosis. Accurate breast imaging and precise needle placement are crucial in lesion targeting. This paper presents an end-effector (EE) for robotic 3D ultrasound (US) breast acquisitions and US-guided breast biopsies. The EE mechanically guides the needle to a specified target within the US plane. The needle is controlled in all degrees of freedom (DOFs) except for the direction of insertion, which is controlled by the radiologist. It determines the correct needle depth and stops the needle accordingly.

methodIn the envisioned procedure, a robotic arm performs localization of the breast, 3D US volume acquisition and reconstruction, target identification and needle guidance. Therefore, the EE is equipped with a stereo camera setup, a picobeamer, US probe holder, a three-DOF needle guide and a needle stop. The design was realized by prototyping techniques. Experiments were performed to determine needle placement accuracy in-air. The EE was placed on a seven-DOF robotic manipulator to determine the biopsy accuracy on a cuboid phantom.

resultsNeedle placement accuracy was 0.3 ± 1.5 mm in and 0.1 ± 0.36 mm out of the US plane. Needle depth was regulated with an accuracy of 100 µm (maximum error 0.89 mm). The maximum holding force of the stop was approximately 6 N. The system reached a Euclidean distance error of 3.21 mm between the needle tip and the target and a normal distance of 3.03 mm between the needle trajectory and the target.

conclusionAn all in one solution was presented which, attached to a robotic arm, assists the radiologist in breast cancer imaging and biopsy. It has a high needle placement accuracy, yet the radiologist is in control like in the conventional procedure.

Indexed as

BreastBreast NeoplasmsEquipment DesignFemaleHumansImage-Guided BiopsyNeedlesPhantoms, ImagingRoboticsUltrasonography, InterventionalUltrasonography, MammaryBiopsyBreastEnd-effectorMRIRegistrationRoboticsUltrasound

Identifiers

PMID32100177
PMCPMC7142059

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.