Robotic and imaging in urological surgery

Current Opinion in Urology

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 108-113

  Teber, Dogu ^a   Baumhauer, Matthias ^b   Guven, Esref Oguz ^c   Rassweiler, Jens ^a,d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

^b GERMAN CANCER RESEARCH CENTER DKFZ   (Germany)

^c MUSTAFA KEMAL UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^d SLK Kliniken Heilbronn   (Germany)

Author keywords

Augmented reality; Minimally invasive surgery; Robotic surgery; Soft tissue navigation; Virtual reality

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; COMPUTER INTERFACE; ECHOGRAPHY; IMAGING SYSTEM; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; ROBOTICS; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; UROLOGIC SURGERY; VIRTUAL REALITY;

HUMANS; ROBOTICS; SURGERY, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, MINIMALLY INVASIVE; UROLOGIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE;

EID: 58149240041     PISSN: 09630643     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MOU.0b013e32831a4776     Document Type: Review

References (51)

1. Sim HG, Yip SKH, Cheng CWS. Equipment and technology in surgical robotics. World J Urol 2006; 24:128-135; review.
2. Davies BL, Hibberd RD, Ng WS, et al. The development of a surgeon robot for prostatectomies. Proc Inst Mech Eng [H] 1991; 205:35-38.
3. Harris SJ, Arambula-Cosio F, Mei Q, et al. The Probot: an active robot for prostate resection. Proc Inst Mech Eng [H] 1997; 211:317-325.
4. Ho G, Ng WS, Teo MY, et al. Experimental study of transurethral robotic laser resection of the prostate using the LaserTrode lightguide. J Biomed Opt 2001; 6:244-251.
5. Cadeddu JA, Bzostek A, Schreiner S, et al. A robotic system for percutaneous renal access. J Urol 1997; 158:1589-1593.
6. Su LM, Stoianovici D, Jarrett TW, et al. Robotic percutaneous access to the kidney: comparison with standard manual access. J Endourol 2002; 16:471-475.
7. Kobayashi E, Masamune K, Sakuma I, et al. A new safe laparoscopic manipulator system with a five-bar linkage mechanism and an optical zoom. Comput Aided Surg 1999; 4:182-192.
8. 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.
9. Shuhaiber JH. Augmented reality in surgery. Arch Surg 2004; 139:170-174; Review.
10. Ukimura O, Gill IS. Imaging-assisted endoscopic surgery: Cleveland Clinic • experience. J Endourol 2008; 22:803-810; review. A state of art review for image-assisted surgery in laparoscopic urology.
11. Linte CA, Moore J, Wiles AD, et al. Virtual reality-enhanced ultrasound guidance: a novel technique for intracardiac interventions. Comput Aided Surg 2008; 13:82-94.
12. Lovo EE, Quintana JC, Puebla MC, et al. A novel, inexpensive method of image coregistration for applications in image-guided surgery using augmented reality. Neurosurgery 2007; 60 (4 Suppl 2):366-371; discussion 371-372.
13. Paul HA, Bargner WL, Mittelstadt B, et al. Development of a surgical robot for cemenfiess hip arthoplasty. Clin Orthop 1992; 285:57-66.
14. Nimsky C, Ganslandt O, Kober H, et al. Integration of functional magnetic resonance imaging supported by magnetoencephalography in functional neuronavigation. Neurosurgery 1999; 44:1249-1255.
15. Baumhauer M, Feuerstein M, Meinzer HP, et al. Navigation in endoscopic soft tissue surgery: perspectives and limitations. J Endourol 2008; 22:751-766. In this excellent article, computer-assisted navigation systems for rigid organ and soft tissue were reviewed. Furthermore, this article informs the reader about intraoperative imaging, tracking devices, organ shift and tissue deformation, and user interface of soft tissue navigation. Finally, challenges and possible benefits of endoscopic navigation surgery were discussed.
16. Rassweiler J, Baumhauer M, Weickert U, et al. The role of imaging and navigation for natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery. J Endourol (in press). An excellent study discussing NOTES with soft tissue navigation.
17. Vosburg KG, Estepar RJS. Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES): an opportunity for augmented reality guidance. Stud Health Technol Inform 2007; 125:485-490.
18. Engelmeier KH, Haubner M, Krapichler C, et al. Virtual reality and clinical applications in progress. Medical Image Display and PACS. In: Proceedings of SPIE Medical Imaging; 2000.
19. Kerner KF, Imielinska C, Rolland J, et al. Augmented reality for teaching endotracheal intubation: MR imaging to create anatomically correct models. In: AMIA Annu Symp Proc; 2003. pp. 888.
20. Botden SM, Buzink SN, Schijven MP, et al. Augmented versus virtual reality laparoscopic simulation: what is the difference? A comparison of the ProMIS augmented reality laparoscopic simulator versus LapSim virtual reality laparoscopic simulator. World J Surg 2007; 31:764-772. This article is an excellent comparison between augmented reality and virtual reality for laparoscopic training simulator, showing that augmented reality laparoscopic simulator offers better training in laparoscopic skills for surgical residents.
21. Keshner EA. Virtual reality and physical rehabilitation: a new toy or a new research and rehabilitation tool? J Neuroeng Rehabil 2004; 1:8.
22. Mott J, Bucolo S, Cuttle L, et al. The efficacy of an augmented virtual reality system to alleviate pain in children undergoing burns dressing changes: a randomised controlled trial. Burns 2008; 34:803-808.
23. Cameron BM, Robb RA. Virtual-reality-assisted interventional procedures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006; 442:63-73; review.
24. Mozer P, Conort P, Leroy A, Baumann M, et al. Aid to percutaneous renal access by virtual projection of the ultrasound puncture tract onto fluoroscopic images. J Endourol 2007; 21:460-465.
25. Galloway RL Jr. The process and development of image-guided procedures. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 2001; 3:83-108; review.
26. Marescaux J, Rubino F, Arenas M, et al. Augmented-reality-assisted laparoscopic adrenalectomy. JAMA 2004; 292:2214-2215.
27. Caversaccio M, Garcia Giraldez J, Thoranaghatte R, et al. Augmented reality endoscopic system (ARES): preliminary results. Rhinology 2008; 46:156-158.
28. Bao P, Sinha TK, Chen CC, et al. A prototype ultrasound-guided laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation system. Surg Endosc 2007; 21:74-79.
29. Kleemann M, Hildebrand P, Birth M, Bruch HP. Laparoscopic ultrasound navigation in liver surgery: technical aspects and accuracy. Surg Endosc 2006; 20:726-729.
30. Hildebrand P, Kleemann M, Roblick UJ, et al. Technical aspects and feasibility of laparoscopic ultrasound navigation in radiofrequency ablation of unresectable hepatic malignancies. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2007; 17: 53-57.
31. Linte CA, Wiles AD, Hill N, et al. An augmented reality enviroment for image-guidance of off-pump mitral valve implantation. Visualization and image guidance procedures. In: Proceedings of SPIE Medical Imaging; 2007.
32. Falk V, Mourgues F, Adhami L, et al. Cardio navigation: planning, simulation, and augmented reality in robotic assisted endoscopic bypass grafting. Ann Thorac Surg 2005; 79:2040-2047.
33. Carter TJ, Sermesant M, Cash DM, et al. Application of soft tissue modelling to image-guided surgery. Med Eng Phys 2005; 27:893-909; review.
34. Skrinjar O, Nabavi A, Duncan J. Model-driven brain shift compensation. Med Image Anal 2002; 6:361-373.
35. Konishi K, Nakamato M, Kakeji Y, et al. A real-time navigation system for laparoscopic surgery based on 3D ultrasound using magneto-optic hybrid tracking configuration. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 2007; 2:1-10. In this study, a navigation system is used with a combination of optical and magnetic tracking devices within a hybrid magneto-optic tracking configuration for laparoscopic interventions.
36. Baumhauer M, Simpfendoerfer T, Wolf I, et al. Soft tissue navigation for laparoscopic prostatectomy: Evaluation of camera pose estimationfor enhanced visualisation. Visualisation and image-guided procedures. In: Proceedings of SPIE Medical Imaging; 2007. Techinical and informatical aspects of IGS.
37. Ukimura O, Okihara K, Kamoi K, et al. Intraoperative ultrasonography in an era of minimally invasive urology. Int J Urol 2008; 15:673-680. An interesting review to understand the place of ultrasound in minimally invasive surgery.
38. Ukimura O, Mitterberger M, Okihara K, et al. Real-time virtual ultrasonographic radiofrequency ablation of renal cell carcinoma. BJU Int 2008; 101:707-711.
39. Melzer A, Schmidt A, Kipfmüller K, et al. Technology and principles of tomographic image-guided interventions and surgery. Surg Endosc 1997; 11:946-956; review.
40. Gould SW, Martin S, Agarwal T, et al. Image-guided surgery for anal fistula in a 0.5T interventional MRI unit. J Magn Reson Imaging 2002; 16:267-276.
41. Morikawa S, Inubushi T, Kurumi Y, et al. New assistive devices for MR-guided microwave thermocoagulation of livertumors. Acad Radiol 2003; 10:180-188.
42. Yasunaga T, Konishi K, Yamaguchi S, et al. MR-compatible laparoscope with a distally mounted CCD for image-guided surgery. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 2007; 2:11-18. A detailed report about successful image guidance with near real-time MRI images and 3D visualization during a laparoscopic liver RFA and future perspectives of intraoperative MRI.
43. Feuerstein M, Mussack T, Heining SM, et al. Intraoperative laparoscope augmentation for port placement and resection planning in minimally invasive liver resection. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2008; 27:355-369.
44. Maintz JB, Viergever MA. A survey of medical image registration. Med Image Anal 1998; 2:1-36; review.
45. Ukimura O, Magi-Galluzzi C, Gill IS. Real-time transrectal ultrasound guidance during nerve-sparing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Impact on surgical margins. J Urol 2006; 175:1304-1308.
46. Herline AJ, Herring JL, Stefansic JD, et al. Surface registration for use in interactive, image-guided liver surgery. Comput Aided Surg 2000; 5:11-17.
47. Hadwiger M, Kniss JM, Rezk-Salama C, et al. Real-time volume graphics. Wellesley, MA: AK Peters; 2006.
48. Kindratenko VV. A survey of electromagnetic position tracker calibration techniques. Virtual reality: Research, development, and applications 2000; 5:169-182.
49. Feuerstein M, Reichl T, Vogel J, et al. Magneto-optic tracking of laparoscopic ultrasound transducer for laparoscopic augmentation. Med Image Comput Assist Interv Int Conf, Lecture Notes in Computr Science. 2007; 458-466. This study examined a navigation system using a hybrid magneto-optic tracking configuration by flexible laparoscopic ultrasound for laparoscopic interventions.
50. Fuchs H, Livingston MA, Raskar R, et al. Augemented reality visualisation for laparoscopic surgery. Proceedings of Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interview Int Conf Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1998; 1496:343.
51. Birkfellner W, Watzinger F, Wanschitz F, et al. Concepts and results in the development of a hybrid tracking system for CAS. In: Proceedings of Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interview Int Conf Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv, Lecture Notes in Computer Science; 1998.