Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34414495›Full record

ArticleCardiovascular and interventional radiology2022

Robotic Assistance System for Cone-Beam Computed Tomography-Guided Percutaneous Needle Placement.

Michael Kostrzewa, Andreas Rothfuss, Torben Pätz, Markus Kühne, Stefan O Schoenberg, Steffen J Diehl, Jan Stallkamp, Nils Rathmann

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cardiovascular and interventional radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. A semi-automated robotic system for percutaneous interventions.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Michael KostrzewaUniversity Medical Center Mannheim, Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Germany.
Andreas RothfussFraunhofer IPA, Fraunhofer Project Group for Automation in Medicine and Biotechnology, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Germany.
Torben PätzFraunhofer MEVIS-Institute for Digital Medicine, Am Fallturm 1, 28359, Bremen, Germany.
Markus KühneFraunhofer IPA, Fraunhofer Project Group for Automation in Medicine and Biotechnology, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Germany.
Stefan O SchoenbergUniversity Medical Center Mannheim, Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Germany.
Steffen J DiehlUniversity Medical Center Mannheim, Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Germany.
Jan StallkampFraunhofer IPA, Fraunhofer Project Group for Automation in Medicine and Biotechnology, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Germany.
Nils RathmannUniversity Medical Center Mannheim, Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Germany. nils.rathmann@umm.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2795-5611
Heidelberg University · DEFraunhofer Institute for Digital Medicine · DETechnische Hochschule Mannheim · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe study aimed to evaluate a new robotic assistance system (RAS) for needle placement in combination with a multi-axis C-arm angiography system for cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in a phantom setting. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe RAS consisted of a tool holder, dedicated planning software, and a mobile platform with a lightweight robotic arm to enable image-guided needle placement in conjunction with CBCT imaging. A CBCT scan of the phantom was performed to calibrate the robotic arm in the scan volume and to plan the different needle trajectories. The trajectory data were sent to the robot, which then positioned the tool holder along the trajectory. A 19G needle was then manually inserted into the phantom. During the control CBCT scan, the exact needle position was evaluated and any possible deviation from the target lesion measured.

resultsIn total, 16 needle insertions targeting eight in- and out-of-plane sites were performed. Mean angular deviation from planned trajectory to actual needle trajectory was 1.12°. Mean deviation from target point and actual needle tip position was 2.74 mm, and mean deviation depth from the target lesion to the actual needle tip position was 2.14 mm. Mean time for needle placement was 361 s. Only differences in time required for needle placement between in- and out-of-plane trajectories (337 s vs. 380 s) were statistically significant (p = 0.0214).

conclusionUsing this RAS for image-guided percutaneous needle placement with CBCT was precise and efficient in the phantom setting.

Indexed as

Robotic Surgical ProceduresCone-Beam Computed TomographyHumansNeedlesPhantoms, ImagingPuncturesCone-beam computed tomographyImage-guided needle placementLeightweight robotRobotic assistance system

Identifiers

PMID34414495
PMCPMC8716352
OpenAlexW3193368830

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.