Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Design and performance evaluation of a master controller for endovascular catheterization

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

It is difficult to manipulate a flexible catheter to target a position within a patient’s complicated and delicate vessels. However, few researchers focused on the controller designs with much consideration of the natural catheter manipulation skills obtained from manual catheterization. Also, the existing catheter motion measurement methods probably lead to the difficulties in designing the force feedback device. Additionally, the commercially available systems are too expensive which makes them cost prohibitive to most hospitals. This paper presents a simple and cost-effective master controller for endovascular catheterization that can allow the interventionalists to apply the conventional pull, push and twist of the catheter used in current practice.

Methods

A catheter-sensing unit (used to measure the motion of the catheter) and a force feedback unit (used to provide a sense of resistance force) are both presented. A camera was used to allow a contactless measurement avoiding additional friction, and the force feedback in the axial direction was provided by the magnetic force generated between the permanent magnets and the powered coil.

Results

Performance evaluation of the controller was evaluated by first conducting comparison experiments to quantify the accuracy of the catheter-sensing unit, and then conducting several experiments to evaluate the force feedback unit. From the experimental results, the minimum and the maximum errors of translational displacement were 0.003 mm (0.01 %) and 0.425 mm (1.06 %), respectively. The average error was 0.113 mm (0.28 %). In terms of rotational angles, the minimum and the maximum errors were \(0.39^{\circ }\) (0.33 %) and \(7.2^{\circ }\) (6 %), respectively. The average error was \(3.61^{\circ }\) (3.01 %). The force resolution was approximately 25 mN and a maximum current of 3A generated an approximately 1.5 N force.

Conclusion

Based on analysis of requirements and state-of-the-art computer-assisted and robot-assisted training systems for endovascular catheterization, a new master controller with force feedback interface was proposed to maintain the natural endovascular catheterization skills of the interventionalists.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Guiatni M, Riboulet V, Duriez C, Kheddar A, Cotin S (2013) A combined force and thermal feedback interface for minimally invasive procedures simulation. IEEE/ASME Trans Mechatron 18(3):1170–1181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Wang J, Ohya T, Liao H, Sakuma I, Wang T, Tohnai I, Iwai T (2011) Intravascular catheter navigation using path planning and virtual visual feedback for oral cancer treatment. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg 7:214–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Luan K, Ohya T, Liao H, Kobayashi E, Sakuma I (2013) Vessel bifurcation localization based on intraoperative three-dimensional ultrasound and catheter path for image-guided catheter intervention of oral cancers. Comput Med Imaging Graph 37(2):113–122

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Srimathveeravalli G, Kesavadas T, Li X (2010) Design and fabrication of a robotic mechanism for remote steering and positioning of interventional devices. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg 6:160–170

    Google Scholar 

  5. http://www.mentice.com/our-simulators/

  6. Aggarwal R, Black SA, Hance JR, Darzi A, Cheshire NJW (2006) Virtual reality simulation training can improve inexperienced surgeons’ endovascular skills. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 31(6):588–593

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. http://simbionix.com/simulators/angio-mentor/

  8. Eslahpazir BA, Goldstone J, Allemang MT, Wang JC, Kashyap VS (2014) Principal considerations for the contemporary high-fidelity endovascular simulator design used in training and evaluation. J Vasc Surg 59(4):1154–1162

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Desser TS (2007) Simulation-based training: the next revolution in radiology education? J Am Coll Radiol 4(11):816–824

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. http://www.hansenmedical.com/int/en/vascular/magellan-robotic-system/product-overview

  11. Saliba W, Reddy VY, Wazni O, Cummings JE, David Burkhardt J, Haissaguerre M, Kautzner J, Peichl P, Neuzil P, Schibgilla V, Noelker G, Brachmann J, Di Biase L, Barrett C, Jais P, Natale A (2008) Atrial fibrillation ablation using a robotic catheter remote control system. J Am Coll Cardiol 51(25):2407–2411

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. http://www.stereotaxis.com/index.php

  13. Chun KRJ, Schmidt B, Köktürk B, Tilz R, Fürnkranz A, Konstantinidou M, Wissner E, Metzner A, Ouyang F, Kuck K-H (2008) Catheter ablation—new developments in robotics. Herz 33:586–589

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Payne, CJ, Rafii-Tari H, Yang G-Z (2012) A force feedback system for endovascular catheterisation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, pp 1298–1304, October 7–12, Vilamoura, Algarve, Portugal

  15. Antoniou GA, Riga CV, Mayer EK, Cheshire NJW, Bicknell CD (2011) Clinical applications of robotic technology in vascular and endovascular surgery. J Vasc Surg 53(2):493–499

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Das P, Goyal T, Xue A, Kalatoor S, Guillaume D (2014) Simulation training in neurological surgery. Austin J Neurosurg 1(1):1–6

    Google Scholar 

  17. Binning MJ, Siddiqui AH, Levy EI, Hopkins LN (2012) Avoiding complications during percutaneous cardiovascular interventions: What should we learn from the aviation industry? In: Complications of interventional cardiovascular procedures: a case-based Atlas. Demos Medical Publishing, pp 1–7

  18. Cercenelli L, Marcelli E, Plicchi G (2007) Initial experience with a telerobotic system to remotely navigate and automatically reposition standard steerable EP catheters. Am Soc Artif Intern Organs J 53(5):523–529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Marcelli E, Cercenelli L, Plicchi G (2008) A novel telerobotic system to remotely navigate standard electrophysiology catheters. In: Computers in cardiology, 2008, September 14–17, Bologna, Italy, pp 137–140

  20. Tanimoto M, Arai F, Fukuda T, Iwata H, Itoigawa K, Gotoh Y, Hashimoto M, Negoro M (1997) Micro force sensor for intravascular neurosurgery. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, April 20–25, Albuquerque, NM, pp 1561–1566

  21. Negoro M, Tanimoto M, Arai F, Fukuda T, Fukasaku K, Takahashi I, Miyachi S (2002) An intelligent catheter system robotic controlled catheter system. Interv Neuroradiol 7:111–113

    PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Tercero C, Ikeda S, Fukuda T, Arai F, Negoro M, Takahashi I (2010) Numerical comparison of catheter insertion trajectory within blood vessel model using image processing. In: 2010 international symposium on micro-nanomechatronics and human science, November 7–10, Nagoya, Japan, pp 378–383

  23. Guo J, Guo S, Xiao N, Ma X, Yoshida S, Takashi T, Masahiko K (2012) A novel robotic catheter system with force and visual feedback for vascular interventional surgery. Int J Mechatron Autom 2(1):15–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Thakui Y, Bax JS, Holdsworth DW, Drangova M (2009) Design and performance evaluation of a remote catheter navigation system. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 56(7):1901–1908

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ma X, Guo S, Xiao N, Yoshida S, Tamiya T (2013) Evaluating performance of a novel developed robotic catheter manipulating system. J Micro-Bio Robot 8(3–4):133–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Kaehler A, Bradski G (2008) Learning OpenCV. O’Reilly Media, Sebastopol

    Google Scholar 

  27. Zhang Z (2002) A flexible new technique for camera calibration. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 22(11):1330–1334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Coles TR, Meglan D, John NW (2011) The role of haptics in medical training simulators: a survey of the state of the art. IEEE Trans Haptics 4(1):51–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Moussa I, Bailey S, Colombo A (2012) Complications of interventional cardiovascular procedures: a case-based atlas. Demos Medical, New York

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported partly by National High Tech. Research and Development Program of China (No. 2015AA043202) and the Kagawa University Characteristic Prior Research Fund 2012.

Conflict of interest

The authors have stated explicitly that there are no conflicts of interest in connection with this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate School of Engineering, Kagawa University, Takamatsu, Kagawa, Japan

    Jin Guo

  2. Intelligent Mechanical Systems Engineering Department, Kagawa University, Takamatsu, Kagawa, Japan

    Shuxiang Guo, Hideyuki Hirata & Hidenori Ishihara

  3. School of Life Science, Beijing Institute of Technology, Haidian District, Beijing, China

    Shuxiang Guo

  4. Department of Neurological Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Kagawa University, Takamatsu, Kagawa, Japan

    Takashi Tamiya

Authors
  1. Jin Guo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shuxiang Guo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Takashi Tamiya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hideyuki Hirata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hidenori Ishihara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jin Guo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Guo, J., Guo, S., Tamiya, T. et al. Design and performance evaluation of a master controller for endovascular catheterization. Int J CARS 11, 119–131 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-015-1211-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-015-1211-4

Keywords