ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2021
Clinical evaluation of a robotic system for precise CT-guided percutaneous procedures.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed, 48 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robotic Needle Insertion for CT-guided Percutaneous Biopsy of Thoracoabdominal Lesions: A Prospective Multicenter Randomized Trial.Radiology. Imaging cancer · 2026Trial
- A novel robot for CT-guided bone needle insertion with a rotational drilling and force-feedback speed control mechanism: preliminary evaluation in swine.Japanese journal of radiology · 2026Article
- Clinical evaluation of the effectiveness of laser localization system in CT-guided percutaneous lung puncture positioning: a prospective randomized controlled pilot study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Robot-assisted CT-guided cryoablation of pulmonary metastases: an IDEAL stage 2a prospective development study.European radiology · 2026Article
- Feasibility, safety and accuracy of a novel robotic navigation system for cone-beam CT-guided and TACE-assisted radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma, a preliminary study.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence Applications in Interventional Radiology.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- Robotic navigation-assisted percutaneous liver puncture: a pilot study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Development and Validation of the Partially-automated Needle Direction Assistant (PANDA) for CT-guided Interventions.Interventional radiology (Higashimatsuyama-shi (Japan) · 2025Article
- Comparison of a Patient-Mounted Needle-Driving Robotic System versus Single-Rotation CT Fluoroscopy to Perform CT-Guided Percutaneous Lung Biopsies.Journal of vascular and interventional radiology : JVIR · 2024Article
- Review of robotic systems for thoracoabdominal puncture interventional surgery.APL bioengineering · 2024Review
- Innovations in Image-Guided Procedures: Unraveling Robot-Assisted Non-Hepatic Percutaneous Ablation.Seminars in interventional radiology · 2024Review
- Image-Guided Ablation of Renal Masses: Challenges to Produce High-Quality Evidence and Future Directions.Seminars in interventional radiology · 2024Review
- Review of robotic surgery platforms and end effectors.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Review
- CRANE: A Redundant, Multi-Degree-of-Freedom Computed Tomography Robot for Heightened Needle Dexterity within a Medical Imaging Bore.IEEE transactions on robotics : a publication of the IEEE Robotics and Automation Society · 2024Article
- Navigation and Robotics in Interventional Oncology: Current Status and Future Roadmap.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Feasibility and Safety of Percutaneous CT-Guided Bone Biopsies in Patients with Cancer Using a Patient-Mounted Robotic System: A Retrospective Analysis of 40 Consecutive Biopsies.Journal of vascular and interventional radiology : JVIR · 2023Article
- Hepatic Arteriography and C-Arm CT-Guided Ablation (HepACAGA) to Improve Tumor Visualization, Navigation and Margin Confirmation in Percutaneous Liver Tumor Ablation.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2023Article
- Evaluation of Accuracy and Performance of a Novel, Fully Gantry Integrated 3D Laser System for Computed Tomography Guided Needle Placement: A Phantom Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Interventional oncology of liver tumors: how it all started and where are we now.The British journal of radiology · 2022Review
- Robotic Tissue Sampling for Safe Post-Mortem Biopsy in Infectious Corpses.IEEE transactions on medical robotics and bionics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo assess accuracy and compare protocols for CT-guided needle insertion for clinical biopsies using a hands-free robotic system, balancing system accuracy with duration of procedure and radiation dose.
methodsThirty-two percutaneous abdominal and pelvic biopsies were performed and analyzed at two centers (Center 1 n = 11; Center 2 n = 21) as part of an ongoing prospective, multi-center study. CT datasets were obtained for planning and controlled placement of 17 g needles using a patient-mounted, CT-guided robotic system. Planning included target selection, skin entry point, and predetermined checkpoints. Additional CT imaging was performed at checkpoints to confirm needle location and permit stepwise correction of the trajectory. Center 1 used a more conservative approach with multiple checkpoints, whereas Center 2 used fewer checkpoints. Scanning and needle advancement were performed under respiratory gating. Accuracy, radiation dose, and steering duration were compared.
resultsOverall accuracy was 1.6 ± 1.5 mm (1.9 ± 1.2 mm Center 1; 1.5 ± 1.6 mm Center 2; p = 0.55). Mean distance to target was 86.2 ± 27.1 mm (p = 0.18 between centers). Center 1 used 4.6 ± 0.8 checkpoints, whereas Center 2 used 1.8 ± 0.6 checkpoints (p < 0.001). Effective radiation doses were lower for Center 1 than for Center 2 (22.2 ± 12.6 mSv vs. 11.7 ± 4.3 mSv; p = 0.002). Likewise, steering duration (from planning to target) was significantly reduced in relation to the number of checkpoints from 43.8 ± 15.9 min for Center 1 to 30.5 ± 10.2 min for Center 2 (p = 0.008).
conclusionsAccurate needle targeting with < 2 mm error can be achieved in patients when using a CT-guided robotic system. Judicious selection of the number of checkpoints may substantially reduce procedure time and radiation dose without sacrificing accuracy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.