Haptic feedback in robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery

Current Opinion in Urology

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 102-107

  Okamura, Allison M ^a  

^a Johns Hopkins University   (United States)

Author keywords

Force; Haptics; Minimally invasive surgery; Robotics; Tactile

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL PRACTICE; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEEDBACK SYSTEM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; ROBOTICS; SURGICAL APPROACH; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; VIRTUAL REALITY;

EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEEDBACK; HUMANS; ROBOTICS; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, MINIMALLY INVASIVE; TECHNOLOGY, MEDICAL; TOUCH PERCEPTION;

EID: 58149215973     PISSN: 09630643     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MOU.0b013e32831a478c     Document Type: Review

References (51)

1. Xin H, Zelek JS, Carnahan H. Laparoscopic surgery, perceptual limitations and force: a review. In: First Canadian Student Conference on Biomedical Computing, Kingston, Ontario, Canada; 2006. No. 144.
2. Burdea CG. Force and Touch Feedback for Virtual Reality. New York: Wiley Interscience; 1996.
3. Jones L, Lederman S. Human Hand Function. New York: Oxford University Press; 2006.
4. Lin MC, Otaduy MA, editors. Haptic Rendering: Foundations, Algorithms, and Applications. London: AK Peters, Ltd; 2008. Provides a current and in-depth review of the field of haptics, focusing on virtual environments. Medical applications are covered.
5. Hayward V, MacLean KE. Do it yourself haptics, Part-I. IEEE Robot. Autom Mag 2007; 14:88-104.
6. MacLean KE, Hayward V. Do It Yourself Haptics, Part-II. IEEE Robot Autom Mag 2008; 15:104-119.
7. Hannaford B, Okamura AM. Chapter 30: Haptics. In: Siciliano B, Khatib O, editors. Handbook of Robotics. New York: Springer; 2008. Provides a brief overview of the field of haptics suitable for a scientifically literate audience.
8. Hayward V, Astley OR, Cruz-Hernandez M, et al. Haptic interfaces and devices. Sensor Rev 2004; 24:16-29.
9. Salisbury K, Conti F, Barbagli F. Haptic rendering: introductory concepts. IEEE Comput Graphics Applicat 2004; 24:24-32.
10. Robles-De-La-Torre G. The importance of the sense of touch in virtual and real environments. IEEE Multimedia 2006; 13:24-30.
11. Westebring - van der Putten EP, Goossens RHM, Jakimowicz JJ, Dankelman J. Haptics in minimally invasive surgery: a review. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 2008; 17:3-16. Reviews the literature from 1985 to 2007 for haptics in both MIS and RMIS.
12. Puangmali P, Althoefer K, Seneviratne LD, et al. State-of-the-art in force and tactile sensing for minimally invasive surgery. IEEE Sensors Journal 2008; 8:371-381. Reviews recent developments of haptic sensing in MIS.
13. Wagner CR, Howe RD. Force Feedback Benet Depends on Experience in Multiple Degree of Freedom Robotic Surgery Task. IEEE Transactions on Robotics 2007; 23:1235-1240. Demonstrates a complete teleoperation system for force feedback RMIS and shows that, while all users improve accuracy with force feedback, only experienced surgeons do not take longer to perform a surgical task.
14. Dargahi J, Sedaghati R, Singh H, Najarian S. Modeling and testing of an endoscopic piezoelectric-based tactile sensor. Mechatronics 2007; 17:462-467.
15. Kuebler B, Seibold U, Hirzinger G. Development of actuated and sensor integrated forceps for minimally invasive robotic surgery. Int J Med Robotics Comput Assist Surg 2005; 1:96-107.
16. Zemiti N, Morel G, Ortmaier T, Bonnet N. Mechatronic design of a new robot for force control in minimally invasive surgery. IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics 2007; 12:143-153.
17. Ortmaier T, Deml B, Kuebler B, et al. Robot assisted force feedback surgery. In: Ferre M, Buss M, Aracil R, et al., editors. Advances in Telerobotics, Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics (STAR) Vol. 31. New York: Springer; 2007. pp. 341-358. With a custom teleoperation system designed for RMIS, the authors showed that haptic feedback reduced unintentional injuries during a dissection task. However, operating time was longer than that of a manual intervention.
18. Mahvash M, Okamura AM. Friction compensation for enhancing transparency of a teleoperator with compliant transmission. IEEE Transactions on Robotics 2007; 23:1240-1246.
19. Semere W, Kitagawa M, Okamura, AM. Teleoperation with sensor/actuator asymmetry: task performance with partial force feedback. In: 12th Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environments and Teleoperator Systems 2004; pp. 121-127.
20. Verner LN, Okamura AM. Effects of translational and gripping force feedback are decoupled in a 4-degree-of-freedom telemanipulator. In: Second Joint Eurohaptics Conference and Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems (World Haptics); 2007, pages 286-291.
21. Kitagawa M, Dokko D, Okamura AM, Yuh DD. Effect of Sensory Substitution on Suture Manipulation Forces for Robotic Surgical Systems. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2005; 129:151-158.
22. Okamura AM. Methods for haptic feedback in teleoperated robot-assisted surgery. Industrial Robot 2004; 31:499-508.
23. Tavakoli M, Aziminejad A, Patel RV, Moallem M. Methods and Mechanisms for Contact Feedback in a Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Environment. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 2006; 10:1570-1579.
24. Schoonmaker RE, Cao CGL. Vibrotactile force feedback system for minimally invasive surgical procedures. In: IEEE Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 2006; pp. 2464-2469.
25. Reiley CE, Akinbiyi T, Burschka D, et al. Effects of visual force feedback on robot-assisted surgical task performance. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2008; 135:196-202. Authors showed that graphical displays of applied force during a knot-tying task reduced suture breakage and overall applied forces, and increased consistency of applied forces for inexperienced robot-assisted surgeons.
26. Cao CGL, Zhou M, Jones DB, Schwaitzberg SD. Can surgeons think and operate with haptics at the same time? J Gastrointest Surg 2007; 11:1564-1569. Authors use a virtual environment to show that force feedback increases accuracy.
27. Mahvash M, Gwilliam J, Agarwal R, et al. Force-feedback surgical teleoperator: controller design and palpation experiments. In: 16th Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environments and Teleoperator Systems 2008; pp. 465-471. Experimental results with a custom force feedback teleoperator based on da Vinci Surgical System hardware showed that direct force feedback is better for palpation than graphical force feedback, but that attempting force feedback without using force sensors limits the system fidelity.
28. Zhou M, Perreault J, Schwaitzberg SD, Cao CGL. Effects of experience on force perception threshold in minimally invasive surgery. Surg Endosc 2008; 22:510-515.
29. Tholey G, Desai JP, Castellanos AE. Force feedback plays a significant role in minimally invasive surgery: results and analysis. Annals of Surgery 2005; 241:102-109.
30. Wagner CR, Stylopoulos N, Jackson PG, Howe RD. The benet of force feedback in surgery: examination of blunt dissection. Presence: teleoperators and virtual environments 2007; 16:252-262. Authors show that increased force feedback results in improved accuracy for a mock blunt dissection task. However, haptic feedback lengthens operation time for novice surgeons.
31. Abbott JJ, Marayong P, Okamura AM. Haptic Virtual Fixtures for Robot-Assisted Manipulation. In: Thrun S, Durrant-Whyte H, Brooks R, editors. Robotics Research, Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics, Vol. 28. 2007; pp. 49-64.
32. Basdogan C, De S, Kim J, Muniyandi M. Haptics in minimally invasive surgical simulation and training. IEEE Computer Graphics Applications 2004; 24:56-64.
33. Ström P1 Hedman L, Särnå L, et al. Early exposure to haptic feedback enhances performance in surgical simulator training: a prospective randomized crossover study in surgical residents. Surg Endosc 2006; 20:1383-1388.
34. Kitagawa M, Okamura AM, Bethea BT, et al. Analysis of suture manipulation forces for teleoperation with force feedback. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention: MICCAI 2002, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2488. Dohi T, Kikinis R, editors. 2002; pp. 155-162.
35. Peine WJ, Howe RD. Do humans sense finger deformation or distributed pressure to detect lumps in soft tissue? In: Proc. of the ASME Dynamic Systems and Control Division, ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, DSC-Vol. 64. 1998; pp. 273-278.
36. Etlaib MEH, Hewit JR. Tactile sensing technology for minimal access surgery: a review. Mechatronics 2003; 13:1163-1177.
37. Pawluk DTV, Son JS, Wellman PS, et al. A Distributed Pressure Sensor for Biomechanical Measurements. ASME J Biomech Eng 1998; 102:302-305.
38. Schostek S, Ho CN, Kalanovic D, Schurr MO. Artificial tactile sensing in minimally invasive surgery: a new technical approach. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 2006; 15:296-304.
39. Dargahi J, Najarian S. A supported membrane type sensor for medical tactile mapping. Sensor Rev 2004; 24:284-297.
40. Dargahi J, Parameswaran M, Payandeh S. A micromachined piezoelectric tactile sensor for an endoscopic grasper - theory, fabrication and experiments. J Microelectromechanical Syst 2000; 9:329-335.
41. Leven J, Burschka D, Kumar R, et al. DaVinci Canvas: a telerobotic surgical system with integrated, robot-assisted, laparoscopic ultrasound capability. In: Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention: MICCAI, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Vol. 3750) 2005; pp. 811-818.
42. Killebrew JH, Bensmaia SJ, Dammann JF, et al. A dense array stimulator to generate arbitrary spatio-temporal tactile stimuli. J Neurosci Methods 2007; 161:62-74.
43. Howe RD, Peine WJ, Kontarinis DA, Son JS. Remote palpation technology. IEEE Eng Med Biol 1995; 14:318-323.
44. Ottermo MV, Stavdahl O, Johansen TA. Electromechanical design of a miniature tactile shape display for minimally invasive surgery. In: First Joint Eurohaptics Conference and Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems (World Haptics) 2005; pp. 561-562.
45. Culjat MO, King CH, Franco ML, Bisley JW, Dutson E, Grundfest WS, 'Pneumatic balloon actuators for tactile feedback in robotic surgery,' Industrial Robot 2008; 35: 449-455. The authors have developed a tactile display consisting of an array of small balloons that provide spatially distributed forces to the fingertip. The device was integrated with the da Vinci surgical system.
46. Moy G, Wagner C, Fearing RS. A compliant tactile display for teletaction. In: IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation 2000; pp. 3409-3415.
47. Feller RL, Lau CKL, Wagner CR, et al. The effect of force feedback on remote palpation. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation 2004; pp. 782-788.
48. Hosseini M, Najarian S, Motaghinasab S, Dargahi J. Detection of tumours using a computational tactile sensing approach. Int J Med Robotics Comput Assist Surg 2006; 2:333-340.
49. Dargahi J, Najarian S, Ramezanifard R. Graphical display of tactile sensing data with application in minimally invasive surgery. Can J Electrical Comput Eng 2007; 32:151-155. A laparoscopic grasper equipped with custom tactile array sensors was used to provide a graphical representation of the tactile data on a computer monitor.
50. Miller AP, Hammoud Z, Son JS, Peine WJ. Tactile imaging system for localizing lung nodules during video assisted thoracoscopic surgery. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation 2007; pp. 2996-3001. A graphical overlay on endoscopic images shows a color map on the surface of tissue. Results indicate that subjects could localize stiff lumps more accurately using the system.
51. Hayward V. A Brief Taxonomy of Tactile Illusions and Demonstrations That Can Be Done In a Hardware Store. Brain Research Bulletin 2008; 75:742-752.