ArticleJapanese journal of radiology2026
A novel robot for CT-guided bone needle insertion with a rotational drilling and force-feedback speed control mechanism: preliminary evaluation in swine.
Article in Japanese journal of radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the feasibility and accuracy of computed tomography (CT)-guided needle insertion into swine bones by using a novel robotic system capable of rotational drilling. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis was an animal experiment using three swine. A remote-controlled robot equipped with a rotational drilling and force-feedback insertion speed control mechanism was developed for bone needle insertion. Using the robot, CT-guided insertion of a 10-gauge bone access needle was attempted in the lumbar vertebrae, ilia, and femora six times each. Needle insertion accuracy was evaluated using the angle error, which is defined as the difference between the predetermined and post-insertion needle angles on axial and sagittal CT images. The time required for needle insertion was measured. The angle error and time required for needle insertion were compared among the bones using the Kruskal-Wallis test. Adverse events were also evaluated.
resultsRobotic bone needle insertion was successful in all attempts. The median axial and sagittal angle errors were 0.21 and 0.21° for the lumbar vertebrae, 0.32 and 0.13° for the ilia, and 0.65 and 0.25° for the femora, respectively. Axial angle errors were significantly different among the bone types (p = 0.038). The time required for needle insertion was 23.6, 21.3, and 59.7 s for the lumbar vertebrae, ilia, and femora, respectively. Time was significantly different among bone types (p = 0.017). No adverse events were observed.
conclusionCT-guided bone needle insertion using a robot equipped with a rotational drilling and force-feedback insertion speed control mechanism was feasible and accurate in swine.
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.