This paper presents the concept of a novel telemanipulator for minimally invasive surgery, along with numerical analysis to validate the main system performance. The proposed kinematic structure consists of a passive and an active module. The passive module is similar to the Selective Compliance Assembly Robot Arm - SCARA robot. The active module is based on a parallelogram mechanism. The results of the numerical study are discussed, focusing on the influence of geometry parameters of the kinematic chain on the displacement accuracy of the end-effector. In particular, the paper deals with the identification of the main factors that impact the position accuracy of the robot.
TaylorRHJoskowiczL. Computer-integrated surgery and medical robotics. In: KutzM (ed.) Standard handbook of biomedical engineering & design. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2003, pp.325–353.
2.
RemboldUBurghartCR.Surgical robotics: an introduction. J Intell Robot Syst2001; 30: 1–28.
3.
PérissatJ.Laparoscopic surgery: a pioneer’s point of view. World J Surg1999; 23: 863–868.
4.
BallantyneGH.Robotic surgery, telerobotic surgery, telepresence, and telementoring. Surg Endoscop Other Intervention Techniq2002; 16: 1389–1402.
5.
HocksteinNGGourinCGFaustRA, et al. A history of robots: from science fiction to surgical robotics. J Robot Surg2007; 1: 113–118.
6.
LeniowskiRPajdaRLeniowskaL, et al. Design of a next generation multibody surgical manipulator. Sci Paper Warsaw Univ Technol Electrotechn Robot Probl2010; 175: 63–78 (in Polish).
7.
BeiraRDR. Dexterous mechanical systems for intuitive telemanipulation in minimally invasive surgery. PhD Thesis. Universidade Técnica De Lisboa, 2013.
8.
PodsedkowskiL.Medical robotic: construction and applications. Warsaw: WNT, 2010 (in Polish).
9.
NawratZ.State of the art in medical robotics in Poland: development of the Robin Heart and other robots. Expert Rev Med Device2012; 9: 353–359.
10.
GronowiczASzrekJWudarczykS. The force reaction control of the wheel-legged robot’s limb prototype. In: BeranJBílekMHejnovaMŽabkaP (eds) Advances in mechanisms design. Berlin: Springer, 2012, pp.303–308.
11.
OlinskiMLewandowskiBGronowiczA.Type synthesis and preliminary design of devices supporting lower limb’s rehabilitation. Acta Bioeng Biomech2015; 17: 117–127.
12.
TsuiKMYancoHA. Assistive, rehabilitation, and surgical robots from the perspective of medical and healthcare professionals. In: MetzlerT (chair) AAAI 2007 workshop on human implications of human-robot interaction. Technical report, WS-07-07, AAAI Press, Menlo Park, CA, June 2007.
13.
RoconEBelda-LoisJMRuizAF, et al. Design and validation of a rehabilitation robotic exoskeleton for tremor assessment and suppression. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehab Eng2007; 15: 367–378.
14.
HagnUOrtmaierTKonietschkeR, et al. Telemanipulator for remote minimally invasive surgery. IEEE Robot Automat Mag2008; 15: 28–38.
15.
StaubChOnoKMayerH, et al. Remote minimally invasive surgery – haptic feedback and selective automation in medical robotics. Appl Bionic Biomech2011; 8: 221–236.
16.
MarescauxJDianaM.Inventing the future of surgery. World J Surg2015; 39: 615–622.
17.
TendickFSastrySS. Minimally invasive robotic telesurgery. In: WillichSNElmS (eds) Medical challenges for the new millennium, Kulwer, Dordrecht, 2001, pp.89–111.
18.
MackMJ.Minimally invasive and robotic surgery, JAMA2001; 285: 568–572.
19.
VitielloVKwokKWYangG. Introduction to robot assisted minimally invasive surgery (MIS). In: GomesP (ed.) Medical robotics: minimally invasive surgery. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing, 2012, pp.1–40.
20.
LanfrancoARCastellanosAEDesaiJP, et al. Robotic surgery a current perspective. Ann Surg2004; 239: 14–21.
21.
KostkaPNawratZ. Tele-manipulation system for minimal invasive surgery support. Prototype for long distance operation. In: KapczyńskiATkaczERostanskiM (eds) Technical Developments and Applications 2. Advances in Intelligent and Soft Computing, vol 118. Berlin: Springer, pp. 279–286.
22.
SpeichJERosenJ. Medical robotics. In: WnekGBowlinG (eds) Encyclopedia of biomaterials and biomedical engineering. New York: Marcel Dekker, 2004, pp.983–993.
23.
FengMFuYPanB, et al. Development of a medical robot system for minimally invasive surgery. Int J Med Robot2012; 8: pp.85–96.
24.
SimaanNXuKWeiW, et al. Design and integration of a telerobotic system for minimally invasive surgery of the throat. Int J Rob Res2009; 28: 1134–1153.
25.
ZemitiNOrtmaierTMorelG. A new robot for force control in minimally invasive surgery. In: IEEE/RSJ International conference on intelligent robots and systems, Sendai, Japan, 28 September–2 November 2004, pp. 3643–3648. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
26.
DogangilGDaviesBLRodriguezY, et al. A review of medical robotics for minimally invasive soft tissue surgery. J Eng Med2004; 224: 653–679.
27.
TrochimczukR.Chosen problems of surgical robots design. Int J Appl Mech Eng2012; 17: 1019–1025.
28.
TrochimczukR.Conception of arm of medical robot dedicated to application of minimally invasive surgery. Solid State Phenomena2013; 198: 3–8.
29.
LisKLehrichKMuchaL, et al. Robin Heart PortVisionAble – design, structure and preliminary studies. Med Robot Rep2014; 3: 6–12 (in Polish).
30.
LumMJTrimbleDRosenJ, et al. Multidisciplinary approach for developing a new minimally invasive surgical robotic system. In: The first IEEE/RAS-EMBS international conference biomedical robotics and biomechatronics (BioRob 2006), Pisa, Italy, 20–22 February 2006, pp. 841–846. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
31.
MiatliukK.Conceptual model in the formal basis of hierarchical systems for mechatronic design. Cybern Syst2015; 46: 666–680.
32.
TischMHertleCAbeleE, et al. Learning factory design: a competency-oriented approach integrating three design levels. Int J Comput Integrat Manuf2016; 29: 1355–1375.
33.
ŁukaszewiczASkorulskiGSzczebiotR. The main aspects of training in the field of computer-aided techniques (CAx) in mechanical engineering. In: Proceedings of 17th International Scientific Conference on Engineering for Rural Development, Jelgava, Latvia, 23–25 May 2018, pp. 865–870.
34.
ŁukaszewiczA.Modelling of solid part using multibody techniques in parametric CAD systems. Solid State Phenomena2009; 147–149: 924–929.
35.
TrochimczukRŁukaszewiczAMikołajczykT. MCAD analysis of working space of surgical telemanipulator dedicated for minimally invasive surgery procedures. In: XXIV Ukrainian-Polish conference CAD in machinery design - implementation and educational issues (CADMD 2016), Lviv, 21–22 October 2016, pp. 63–64. Lviv: Lviv Polytechnic Publishing House.
36.
MikolajczykTBorboniAMackowskiD, et al. Example of tool with two numerical controlled axes. Appl Mech Mater2015; 772: 224–228.
37.
MikolajczykTDorszDRomanowskiŁ.Design and control system of parallel kinematic manipulator. Appl Mech Mater2013; 436: 390–397.
38.
LaskiPATakosogluJEBlasiakS.Design of a 3-DOF tripod electro-pneumatic parallel manipulator. Robot Auton Syst2015; 72: 59–70.
