Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33394359›Full record

ArticleUpdates in surgery2021

Robotic assistance for quick and accurate image-guided needle placement.

Abigail J Fong, Camille L Stewart, Kelly Lafaro, Christopher J LaRocca, Yuman Fong, Joseph D Femino, Brooke Crawford

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Updates in surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Robotic Assistance in Percutaneous Liver Ablation Therapies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Technological Advancements in Interventional Oncology.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  6. Article
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Abigail J FongCedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, 90048, USA.
Camille L StewartDepartment of Surgery, City of Hope National Medical Center, 1500 E. Duarte Road, Duarte, CA, 91010, USA.
Kelly LafaroDepartment of Surgery, City of Hope National Medical Center, 1500 E. Duarte Road, Duarte, CA, 91010, USA.
Christopher J LaRoccaDepartment of Surgery, City of Hope National Medical Center, 1500 E. Duarte Road, Duarte, CA, 91010, USA.
Yuman FongDepartment of Surgery, City of Hope National Medical Center, 1500 E. Duarte Road, Duarte, CA, 91010, USA. yfong@coh.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8934-9959
Joseph D FeminoDepartment of Surgery, City of Hope National Medical Center, 1500 E. Duarte Road, Duarte, CA, 91010, USA.
Brooke CrawfordUCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA.
City Of Hope National Medical Center · USCedars-Sinai Medical Center · USUCLA Medical Center · US

Funding

Transgenic Mouse FacilityP30CA033572 · NCI · CITY OF HOPE/BECKMAN RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI XIWEI WU · 1985 to 2026
$86.3M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA033572NCI NIH HHS P30CA033572
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Computed tomography (CT) image-guided procedures including biopsy, drug delivery, and ablation are gaining increasing application in medicine. Robotic technology holds the promise for allowing surgeons, and other proceduralists, access to such CT-guided procedures by potentially shortening training, improving accuracy, decreasing needle passes, and reducing radiation exposure. We evaluated surgeon learning and proficiency for image-guided needle placement with an FDA-cleared robotic arm. Five out of six surgeons had no prior CT-guided procedural experience, while one had prior experience with freehand CT-guided needle placement. All surgeons underwent a 60-min training with the MAXIO robot (Perfint Healthcare, Redmond, WA). The robot was used to place needles into three different pre-specified targets on a spine model. Performance time, procedural errors, and needle placement accuracy were recorded. All participants successfully placed needles into the targets using the robotic arm. The average time for needle placement was 3:44 ± 1:43 min. Time for needle placement decreased with subsequent attempts, with average third placement taking 2:29 ± 1:51 min less than the first attempt. The average vector distance from the target was 2.3 ± 1.2 mm. One error resulted in the need for reimaging by CT scan. No errant needle placement occurred. Surgeons (attending fellows and residents) without previous experience and minimal training could successfully place percutaneous needles under CT guidance quickly, accurately, and reproducibly using a robotic arm. This suggests that robotic technology may be used to facilitate surgeon adoption of CT image-guided needle-based procedures in the future.

Indexed as

RoboticsRobotic Surgical ProceduresHumansNeedlesPhantoms, ImagingTomography, X-Ray ComputedImage guidanceMAXIORoboticsSurgical technology

Identifiers

PMID33394359
PMCPMC9394543
OpenAlexW3119958418

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.