Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34422445›Full record

ArticleIEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation : ICRA : [proceedings]. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation

A Fully Actuated Body-Mounted Robotic Assistant for MRI-Guided Low Back Pain Injection.

Gang Li, Niravkumar A Patel, Weiqiang Liu, Di Wu, Karun Sharma, Kevin Cleary, Jan Fritz, Iulian Iordachita

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation : ICRA : [proceedings]. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 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
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Toward Autonomous Marker Localization for Lumbar Epidural Steroid Injection Robot.Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference · 2024
    Article
  3. Modeling and Control of an MR-Safe Pneumatic Radial Inflow Motor and Encoder (PRIME).IEEE/ASME transactions on mechatronics : a joint publication of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society and the ASME Dynamic Systems and Control Division · 2024
    Article
  4. A magnetic resonance conditional robot for lumbar spinal injection: Development and preliminary validation.The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Flexible Needle Bending Model for Spinal Injection Procedures.IEEE robotics and automation letters · 2023
    Article
  7. Fluoroscopy-Guided Robotic System for Transforaminal Lumbar Epidural Injections.IEEE transactions on medical robotics and bionics · 2022
    Article
  8. An MR-Conditional Needle Driver for Robot-Assisted Spinal Injections: Design Modifications and Evaluations.Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference · 2022
    Article
  9. State of the Art and Future Opportunities in MRI-Guided Robot-Assisted Surgery and Interventions.Proceedings of the IEEE. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers · 2022
    Article
  10. Body-Mounted Robotics for Interventional MRI Procedures.IEEE transactions on medical robotics and bionics · 2020
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Towards Safe In Situ Needle Manipulation for Robot Assisted Lumbar Injection in Interventional MRI.Proceedings of the ... IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems
    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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Gang LiLaboratory for Computational Sensing and Robotics (LCSR), Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Niravkumar A PatelLaboratory for Computational Sensing and Robotics (LCSR), Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Weiqiang LiuLaboratory for Computational Sensing and Robotics (LCSR), Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Di WuLaboratory for Computational Sensing and Robotics (LCSR), Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Karun SharmaInstitute for Pediatric Surgical Innovation, Children's National Health System, Washington, DC, USA.
Kevin ClearyInstitute for Pediatric Surgical Innovation, Children's National Health System, Washington, DC, USA.
Jan FritzDepartment of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Iulian IordachitaLaboratory for Computational Sensing and Robotics (LCSR), Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Johns Hopkins University · USChildren's National · US

Funding

MRI Compatible Robot for Improved Pain Injections in Adults and ChildrenR01EB025179 · NIBIB · CHILDREN'S RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI CLEARY, KEVIN R. · 2018 to 2021
$2.8M
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB025179
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper reports the development of a fully actuated body-mounted robotic assistant for MRI-guided low back pain injection. The robot is designed with a 4-DOF needle alignment module and a 2-DOF remotely actuated needle driver module. The 6-DOF fully actuated robot can operate inside the scanner bore during imaging; hence, minimizing the need of moving the patient in or out of the scanner during the procedure, and thus potentially reducing the procedure time and streamlining the workflow. The robot is built with a lightweight and compact structure that can be attached directly to the patient's lower back using straps; therefore, attenuating the effect of patient motion by moving with the patient. The novel remote actuation design of the needle driver module with beaded chain transmission can reduce the weight and profile on the patient, as well as minimize the imaging degradation caused by the actuation electronics. The free space positioning accuracy of the system was evaluated with an optical tracking system, demonstrating the mean absolute errors (MAE) of the tip position to be 0.99±0.46 mm and orientation to be 0.99±0.65°. Qualitative imaging quality evaluation was performed on a human volunteer, revealing minimal visible image degradation that should not affect the procedure. The mounting stability of the system was assessed on a human volunteer, indicating the 3D position variation of target movement with respect to the robot frame to be less than 0.7 mm.

Identifiers

PMID34422445
PMCPMC8375549
OpenAlexW3090061826

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.