Image-Guided Robotics for Standardized and Automated Biopsy and Ablation

Anna S. Christou; Amel Amalou; HooWon Lee; Jocelyne Rivera; Rui Li; Michael T. Kassin; Nicole Varble; Zion Tsz Ho Tse; Sheng Xu; Bradford J. Wood

doi:10.1055/s-0041-1739164

Seminars in Interventional Radiology, Inhaltsverzeichnis

Semin intervent Radiol 2021; 38(05): 565-575
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1739164

Review Article

Image-Guided Robotics for Standardized and Automated Biopsy and Ablation

Anna S. Christou

¹Center for Interventional Oncology, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland

,

Amel Amalou

¹Center for Interventional Oncology, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland

,

HooWon Lee

¹Center for Interventional Oncology, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland

,

Jocelyne Rivera

¹Center for Interventional Oncology, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland

,

Rui Li

²Tandon School of Engineering, New York University, Brooklyn, New York

,

Michael T. Kassin

¹Center for Interventional Oncology, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland

,

Nicole Varble

¹Center for Interventional Oncology, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland

⁷Philips Research North America, Cambridge, Massachusetts

,

Zion Tsz Ho Tse

³Department of Electrical Engineering, University of York, Heslington, York, United Kingdom

,

Sheng Xu

¹Center for Interventional Oncology, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland

,

Bradford J. Wood

¹Center for Interventional Oncology, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland

⁴Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland

⁵National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland

⁶Interventional Radiology, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland

› Institutsangaben

Abstract

Image-guided robotics for biopsy and ablation aims to minimize procedure times, reduce needle manipulations, radiation, and complications, and enable treatment of larger and more complex tumors, while facilitating standardization for more uniform and improved outcomes. Robotic navigation of needles enables standardized and uniform procedures which enhance reproducibility via real-time precision feedback, while avoiding radiation exposure to the operator. Robots can be integrated with computed tomography (CT), cone beam CT, magnetic resonance imaging, and ultrasound and through various techniques, including stereotaxy, table-mounted, floor-mounted, and patient-mounted robots. The history, challenges, solutions, and questions facing the field of interventional radiology (IR) and interventional oncology are reviewed, to enable responsible clinical adoption and value definition via ergonomics, workflows, business models, and outcome data. IR-integrated robotics is ready for broader adoption. The robots are coming!

Keywords

biopsy - ablation - robotics - stereotactic navigation - treatment planning - interventional radiology

Volltext

Referenzen

References
1 Kassamali RH, Ladak B. The role of robotics in interventional radiology: current status. Quant Imaging Med Surg 2015; 5 (03) 340-343
2 Tacher V, de Baere T. Robotic assistance in interventional radiology: dream or reality?. Eur Radiol 2020; 30 (02) 925-926
3 Leal Ghezzi T, Campos Corleta O. 30 Years of robotic surgery. World J Surg 2016; 40 (10) 2550-2557
4 Wood BJ, Yanof JH. CT-guided interventional oncology: bridging the gap between diagnosis and therapy. Kontraste (Hamburg) 2005; 49 (03) 28-32
5 Makarov DV, Li H, Lepor H, Gross CP, Blustein J. Teaching hospitals and the disconnect between technology adoption and comparative effectiveness research: the case of the surgical robot. Med Care Res Rev 2017; 74 (03) 369-376
6 Williams SB, Prado K, Hu JC. Economics of robotic surgery: does it make sense and for whom?. Urol Clin North Am 2014; 41 (04) 591-596
7 Koethe Y, Xu S, Velusamy G, Wood BJ, Venkatesan AM. Accuracy and efficacy of percutaneous biopsy and ablation using robotic assistance under computed tomography guidance: a phantom study. Eur Radiol 2014; 24 (03) 723-730
8 Beermann M, Lindeberg J, Engstrand J. et al. 1000 consecutive ablation sessions in the era of computer assisted image guidance - lessons learned. Eur J Radiol Open 2019; 6: 1-8
9 Tinguely P, Frehner L, Lachenmayer A. et al. Stereotactic image-guided microwave ablation for malignant liver tumors - a multivariable accuracy and efficacy analysis. Front Oncol 2020; 10: 842
10 Schaible J, Pregler B, Verloh N. et al. Improvement of the primary efficacy of microwave ablation of malignant liver tumors by using a robotic navigation system. Radiol Oncol 2020; 54 (03) 295-300
11 Citone M, Fanelli F, Falcone G, Mondaini F, Cozzi D, Miele V. A closer look to the new frontier of artificial intelligence in the percutaneous treatment of primary lesions of the liver. Med Oncol 2020; 37 (06) 55
12 Heerink WJ, Ruiter SJS, Pennings JP. et al. Robotic versus freehand needle positioning in CT-guided ablation of liver tumors: a randomized controlled trial. Radiology 2019; 290 (03) 826-832
13 Wood BJ, Locklin JK, Viswanathan A. et al. Technologies for guidance of radiofrequency ablation in the multimodality interventional suite of the future. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2007; 18 (1, Pt 1): 9-24
14 Markezana A, Goldberg SN, Kumar G. et al. Incomplete thermal ablation of tumors promotes increased tumorigenesis. Int J Hyperthermia 2021; 38 (01) 263-272
15 Stone MJ, Wood BJ. Emerging local ablation techniques. Semin Intervent Radiol 2006; 23 (01) 85-98
16 Solomon SB, Patriciu A, Bohlman ME, Kavoussi LR, Stoianovici D. Robotically driven interventions: a method of using CT fluoroscopy without radiation exposure to the physician. Radiology 2002; 225 (01) 277-282
17 Putzer D, Schullian P, Braunwarth E. et al. Integrating interventional oncology in the treatment of liver tumors. Eur Surg 2018; 50 (03) 117-124
18 Bale R, Schullian P, Eberle G. et al. Stereotactic radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma: a histopathological study in explanted livers. Hepatology 2019; 70 (03) 840-850
19 Xu S, Kruecker J, Turkbey B. et al. Real-time MRI-TRUS fusion for guidance of targeted prostate biopsies. Comput Aided Surg 2008; 13 (05) 255-264
20 Liao R, Zhang L, Sun Y, Miao S, Chefdhotel C. A review of recent advances in registration techniques applied to minimally invasive therapy. IEEE Trans Multimed 2013; 15 (05) 983-1000
21 Hoffmann J, Westendorff C, Leitner C, Bartz D, Reinert S. Validation of 3D-laser surface registration for image-guided cranio-maxillofacial surgery. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2005; 33 (01) 13-18
22 Khan FR, Henderson JM. Deep brain stimulation surgical techniques. Handbook of Clinical Neurology Brain Stimulation. Elsevier; 2013. 116. 27-37
23 Brown RA. A stereotactic head frame for use with CT body scanners. Invest Radiol 1979; 14 (04) 300-304
24 Khadem R, Yeh CC, Sadeghi-Tehrani M. et al. Comparative tracking error analysis of five different optical tracking systems. Comput Aided Surg 2000; 5 (02) 98-107
25 Sorriento A, Porfido MB, Mazzoleni S. et al. Optical and electromagnetic tracking systems for biomedical applications: a critical review on potentialities and limitations. IEEE Rev Biomed Eng 2019; 13: 212-232
26 Franz AM, Haidegger T, Birkfellner W, Cleary K, Peters TM, Maier-Hein L. Electromagnetic tracking in medicine – a review of technology, validation, and applications. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2014; 33 (08) 1702-1725
27 Geist E, Shimada K. Position error reduction in a mechanical tracking linkage for arthroscopic hip surgery. Int J CARS 2011; 6 (05) 693-698
28 Kettenbach J, Kronreif G. Robotic systems for percutaneous needle-guided interventions. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 2015; 24 (01) 45-53
29 Lachenmayer A, Tinguely P, Maurer MH. et al. Stereotactic image-guided microwave ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma using a computer-assisted navigation system. Liver Int 2019; 39 (10) 1975-1985
30 Schaible J, Lürken L, Wiggermann P. et al. Primary efficacy of percutaneous microwave ablation of malignant liver tumors: comparison of stereotactic and conventional manual guidance. Sci Rep 2020; 10 (01) 18835
31 Guiu B, De Baère T, Noel G, Ronot M. Feasibility, safety and accuracy of a CT-guided robotic assistance for percutaneous needle placement in a swine liver model. Sci Rep 2021; 11 (01) 5218
32 Hiraki T, Kamegawa T, Matsuno T. et al. Robotic needle insertion during computed tomography fluoroscopy-guided biopsy: prospective first-in-human feasibility trial. Eur Radiol 2020; 30 (02) 927-933
33 Komaki T, Hiraki T, Kamegawa T. et al. Robotic CT-guided out-of-plane needle insertion: comparison of angle accuracy with manual insertion in phantom and measurement of distance accuracy in animals. Eur Radiol 2020; 30 (03) 1342-1349
34 Levy S, Goldberg SN, Roth I. et al. Clinical evaluation of a robotic system for precise CT-guided percutaneous procedures. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2021;
35 Pfeil A, Cazzato RL, Barbé L. et al. Robotically assisted CBCT-guided needle insertions: preliminary results in a phantom model. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2019; 42 (02) 283-288
36 Monfaredi R, Cleary K, Sharma K. MRI robots for needle-based interventions: systems and technology. Ann Biomed Eng 2018; 46 (10) 1479-1497
37 Barral M, Lefevre A, Camparo P. et al. In-bore transrectal MRI-guided biopsy with robotic assistance in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: an analysis of 57 patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2019; 213 (04) W171-W179
38 Britz GW, Panesar SS, Falb P, Tomas J, Desai V, Lumsden A. Neuroendovascular-specific engineering modifications to the CorPath GRX Robotic System. J Neurosurg 2019; ; (epub ahead of print)
39 Mahmud E, Schmid F, Kalmar P. et al. Feasibility and safety of robotic peripheral vascular interventions: results of the RAPID trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2016; 9 (19) 2058-2064
40 de Ruiter QMB, Karanian JW, Bakhutashvili I. et al. Endobronchial navigation guided by cone-beam CT-based augmented fluoroscopy without a bronchoscope: feasibility study in phantom and swine. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2020; 31 (12) 2122-2131
41 Jiang J, Chang SH, Kent AJ, Geraci TC, Cerfolio RJ. Current novel advances in bronchoscopy. Front Surg 2020; 7: 596925
42 Kent AJ, Byrnes KA, Chang SH. State of the art: robotic bronchoscopy. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2020; 32 (04) 1030-1035
43 Li R, Xu S, Pritchard WF. et al. AngleNav: MEMS tracker to facilitate CT-guided puncture. Ann Biomed Eng 2018; 46 (03) 452-463
44 Park BJ, Hunt SJ, Martin III C, Nadolski GJ, Wood BJ, Gade TP. Augmented and mixed reality: technologies for enhancing the future of IR. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2020; 31 (07) 1074-1082
45 Hecht R, Li M, de Ruiter QMB. et al. Smartphone augmented reality CT-based platform for needle insertion guidance: a phantom study. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2020; 43 (05) 756-764
46 Long DJ, Li M, De Ruiter QMB. et al. Comparison of smartphone augmented reality, smartglasses augmented reality, and 3D CBCT-guided fluoroscopy navigation for percutaneous needle insertion: a phantom study. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2021; 44 (05) 774-781