Medical technologies have undergone significant development to overcome the problems inherent in minimally invasive surgery such as inhibited manual dexterity, reduced visual information, and lack of direct touch feedback to make it easier for surgeons to operate. A minimally invasive tool incorporating haptic feedback is being developed to increase the effectiveness of diagnostic procedures by providing force feedback. Magnetic resonance imaging guidance is possible to allow tool localization; however, this engenders the requirement of magnetic resonance compatibility on the device. This paper describes the work done towards developing a sensing device using piezoelectric sensor elements to locate subsurface inclusions in soft substrates, with its magnetic resonance compatibility tested in a 1.5 T scanner. Results show that the position of a hard inclusion can be determined.
MackM. J.‘Minimally invasive and robotic surgery.’Jama285 (2001): 568–572
2.
EltaibM. E.HewitJ. R.‘Tactile sensing technology for minimal access surgery — a review.’Mechatronics13 (2003): 1163–1177
3.
HoweR. D.MatsuokaY.‘Robotics for surgery.’A. Rev. Biomed. Engng1 (1999): 211–240
4.
VirtanenJ.Enhancing the compatibility of surgical robots with magnetic resonance imaging PhD Dissertation, Faculty of Technology, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland, 2006.
5.
McRobbieD.MooreE. A.GravesM. J.PrinceM. R.MRI: from picture to proton, 1st edition (Cambridge University Press2003)
KosekiY.ChinzeiK.KoyachiN.AraiT.‘Robotic assist for MR-guided surgery using leverage and parallelepiped mechanism.’ In Proceedings of the Third International Medical Image Computing and Computer-assisted Intervention (MICCAI 2000), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1935, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA 2000 pp. 940–948 (Springer-VerlagBerlin).
8.
ChinzeiK.HataN.JoleszF. A.KikinisR.‘Surgical assist robot for the active navigation in the intraoperative MRI: hardware design issues.’ In Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent robots and systems (IROS 2000), Takamatsu, Japan 2000, pp. 727–732 (IEEE, New York).
9.
ElhawaryH.ZivanovicA.ReaM.DaviesB. L.BesantC.McRobbieD.SouzaN. D.YoungI.LamperthM.‘A modular approach to MRI compatible robotics: Interconnectable one DOF stages.’IEEE Engng Medicine in Biology Mag.27 (3) (2008): 35–41
10.
StoianoviciD.‘Multi-imager compatible actuation principles in surgical robotics.’Int. J. Medical Robotics Computer Assisted Surgery1 (2005): 86–100
11.
Standard practice for marking medical devices and other items for safety in the magnetic resonance environment (ASTM International2005)
12.
ChinzeiK.KikinisR.JoleszF. A.‘MR compatibility of mechatronic devices: design criteria.’ In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention (MICCAI 99), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1679, Cambridge, UK 1999, pp. 1020–1030 (Springer-VerlagBerlin).
13.
BurdetE.GassertR.GowrishankarG.ChapuisD.BleulerH.‘fMRI compatible haptic interfaces to investigate human motor control.’ In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Experimental robotics (ISER 2004), Singapore 2004, pp. 25–34 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin).
14.
TadaM.KanadeT.‘Design of an MR-compatible three-axis force sensor.’ In Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent robots and systems (IROS 2005)
15.
MoserR.GassertR.BurdetE.SacheL.WoodtliH. R.ErnoJ.MaederW.BleulerH.‘An MR compatible robot technology.’ In Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and automation (ICRA ’03), Taipei, Taiwan 2003, pp. 670–675 (IEEE, New York).
16.
GassertR.ChapuisD.BleulerH.BurdetE.‘Sensors for applications in magnetic resonance environments.’IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics13 (3) (2008): 335–344
17.
SutherlandG. R.McBethP. B.LouwD. F.‘NeuroArm: an MR compatible robot for microsurgery.’ In Proceedings of the 17th International Congress and Exhibition on Computer assisted radiology and surgery (CARS 2003), International Congress Series vol. 1256, 2003, pp. 504–508 (Elsevier, Amsterdam).
18.
TseZ. T. H.ElhawaryH.ZivanovicA.LamperthM.‘A one degree of freedom MR compatible haptic system for tissue palpation.’ In Proceedings of the 13th Annual Meeting of the British Chapter of the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, 2007, paper 013 (BCISMRM, Birmingham, UK)
19.
TholeyG.PillarisettiA.GreenW.DesaiJ. P.‘Design, development, and testing of an automated laparoscopic grasper with 3-D force measurement capability.’ In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Medical simulation (ISMS 2004), Lecture Notes in Computer Science vol. 3078, 2004, pp. 38–48 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin).
20.
ShostekS.HoC.KalanovicD.SchurrM. O.‘Artificial tactile sensing in minimally invasive surgery — a new technical approach.’Minimally Invasive Therapies Allied Technologies15 (5) (2006): 296–304
21.
DargahiJ.NajarianS.‘An endoscopic force—position sensor grasper with minimum sensors.’Can. J. Electl Computer Engng28 (3) (2003): 155–161
22.
RosenJ.HannafordB.MacFarlaneM. P.SinananM. N.‘Force controlled and teleoperated endoscopic grasper for minimally invasive surgery — experimental performance evaluation.’IEEE Trans. Biomed. Engng46 (10) (1999): 1212–1221
23.
MadhaniA. J.NiemeyerG.SalisburyJ. K.‘The black falcon: a teleoperated surgical instrument for minimally invasive surgery.’ In Proceedings of the 1998 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS ’98), Victoria, Canada 1998, pp. 936–944 (IEEE, New York).
24.
RizunP. R.GunnD. C.CoxB. L.SutherlandG. R.‘Mechanical design of haptic forceps for robotic surgery.’ In Proceedings of the Symposium on Haptic interfaces for virtual environment and teleoperator systems, Arlington, Virginia, USA 2006, pp. 331–335 (IEEE, New York).
25.
FieldD.Anatomy: palpation and surface markings, 2nd edition (Butterworth—Heinemann1997)
26.
BryantR. J.HamdyF. C.‘Screening for prostate cancer: An update.’Eur. Urology53 (1) (2008): 37–44
27.
ReaM.McRobbieD.ElhawaryH.TseZ. T. H.LamperthM.YoungI.‘System for 3-D real-time tracking of MRI-compatible devices by image processing.’ASME/IEEE Trans. Mechatronics13 (3) (2008): 379–382
28.
ElhawaryH.ZivanovicA.ReaM.TseZ. T. H.McRobbieD.YoungI. R.PaleyM.DaviesB.LamperthM.‘An MR compatible mechatronic system to facilitate magic angle experiments in-vivo.’ In Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention (MICCAI 2007), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4792, Brisbane, Australia2007, pp. 604–611 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin).
29.
WellmanP. H.HoweR. D.DaltonE.KernK. A.‘Breast tissue stiffness in compression is correlated to histological diagnosis.’Technical Report, Harvard BioRobotics Laboratory, Harvard University1999.
30.
BurdeaG.Force and touch feedback for virtual reality (John Wiley1996)
31.
DargahiJ. S. N.‘Human tactile perception as a standard for artificial tactile sensing — a review.’Int. J. Med. Robotics Computer Assisted Surg.1 (2004): 23–35
