Force feedback in a piezoelectric linear actuator for neurosurgery

International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery

Volumn 7, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 268-275

  De Lorenzo, Danilo ^a   De Momi, Elena ^a,b   Dyagilev, Ilya ^c   Manganelli, Rudy ^d   Formaglio, Alessandro ^d   Prattichizzo, Domenico ^d,e   Shoham, Moshe ^c   Ferrigno, Giancarlo ^a,b  

^a POLITECNICO DI MILANO   (Italy)

^b CNR   (Italy)

^c TECHNION ISRAEL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Israel)

^d UNIVERSITY OF SIENA   (Italy)

^e ISTITUTO ITALIANO DI TECNOLOGIA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Force feedback; Force sensor; Keyhole neurosurgery; Robotic surgery

Indexed keywords

BIOMECHANICS; DEGREES OF FREEDOM (MECHANICS); FEEDBACK; FRICTION; HAPTIC INTERFACES; HISTOLOGY; NEUROSURGERY; PROBES; STRAIN GAGES; SURGICAL EQUIPMENT; TISSUE;

FORCE SENSOR; FORCE-FEEDBACK; FRICTION FORCE; HUMAN OPERATOR; KEYHOLE NEUROSURGERY; MINIMALLY-INVASIVE SURGERY; OFF-AXIS; PIEZOELECTRIC; ROBOTICS SURGERY; SURGICAL TOOLS;

ROBOTIC SURGERY;

ARTICLE; BRAIN BIOPSY; ELECTRONICS; ERROR; FEEDBACK SYSTEM; FORCE; HUMAN; NEUROSURGERY; PIEZOELECTRICITY; PSYCHOPHYSICS; RELIABILITY; REMOTE SENSING; STRAIN GAUGE TRANSDUCER; SURGEON; BIOPSY; BRAIN; COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY; COMPUTER INTERFACE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DEVICES; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; MECHANICAL STRESS; MICROSURGERY; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; REPRODUCIBILITY; ROBOTIC SURGICAL PROCEDURE;

BIOPSY; BRAIN; COMPUTER SIMULATION; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEEDBACK; HUMANS; MICROSURGERY; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGICAL PROCEDURES; NEUROSURGICAL PROCEDURES; PSYCHOPHYSICS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; ROBOTIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES; STRESS, MECHANICAL; SURGERY, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE;

EID: 80051941422     PISSN: 14785951     EISSN: 1478596X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/rcs.391     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Cossu M, Lo Russo G, Francione S, et al. Epilepsy surgery in children: results and predictors of outcome on seizures. Epilepsia 2008; Jan; 49(1): 65-72.
2. Alpha Omega Engineering (Internet). (Accessed June 28, 2010).; Available from: .
3. Sutherland G, Latour I, Greer A. Integrating an image-guided robot with intraoperative MRI: a review of the design and construction of neuroArm. IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag 2008; May; 27(3): 59-65.
4. Hager GD, Okamura AM, Kazanzides P, et al. Surgical and interventional robotics: part III: surgical assistance systems. IEEE Robot Automat Mag 2008; Dec; 15(4): 84-93.
5. Son HI, Bhattacharjee T, Lee DY. Estimation of environmental force for the haptic interface of robotic surgery. Int J Med Rob Comp Ass Surg 2010; Jun; 6(2): 221-230.
6. Vlachos K, Papadopoulos E. Transparency maximization methodology for haptic devices. IEEE/ASME Trans Mechatronics 2006; Jun; 11(3): 249-255.
7. Mahvash M, Okamura AM. Friction compensation for enhancing transparency of a teleoperator with compliant transmission. IEEE Trans Robot 2007; Dec; 23(6): 1240-1246.
8. Puangmali P, Althoefer K, Seneviratne LD, et al. State-of-the-art in force and tactile sensing for minimally invasive surgery. IEEE Sensors J 2008; Apr; 8(4): 371-381.
9. Rossi A, Trevisani A, Zanotto V. A telerobotic haptic system for minimally invasive stereotactic neurosurgery. Int J Med Robotics Comput Assist Surg 2005; Jan; 1(2): 64-75.
10. Wagner CR, Howe RD. Force feedback benefit depends on experience in multiple degree of freedom robotic surgery task. IEEE Trans Robot 2007; Dec; 23(6): 1235-1240.
11. Kuebler B, Seibold U, Hirzinger G. Development of actuated and sensor integrated forceps for minimally invasive surgery. Int J Med Robotics Comput Assist Surg 2005; 1(3): 96-107.
12. Dario P, Hannaford B, Menciassi A. Smart surgical tools and augmenting devices. IEEE Trans Robot Automat 2003; Oct; 19(5): 782-792.
13. Hannaford B. A design framework for teleoperators with kinesthetic feedback. IEEE Trans Robot Automat 1989; 5(4): 426-434.
14. Lau HYK, Wai LCC. Implementation of position-force and position-position teleoperator controllers with cable-driven mechanisms. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 2005; Apr; 21(2): 145-152.
15. Rosen J, Hannaford B, MacFarlane M, Sinanan M. Force Controlled and teleoperated endoscopic grasper for minimally invasive surgery-experimental performance evaluation. IEEE Trans Biom Eng 1999; Oct; 46(10): 1212-1221.
16. Hacksel PJ, Salcudean SE. Estimation of environment forces and rigid-body velocities using observers. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, May 1994; San Diego, CA; 931-936.
17. Katsura S, Matsumoto Y, Ohnishi K. Analysis and experimental validation of force bandwidth for force control. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2006; 53(3): 922-928.
18. Crouch JR, Schneider CM, Wainer J, Okamura AM. A velocity-dependent model for needle insertion in soft tissue. Med Image Comput Assist Interv 2005; 8: 624-632.
19. Yang M, Zahn JD. Microneedle insertion force reduction using vibratory actuation. Biomed Microdevices 2004; Sep; 6(3): 177-182.
20. De Lorenzo D, Manganelli R, Dyagilev I, et al. Miniaturized rigid probe driver with haptic loop control for neurosurgical interventions. In Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics (BioRob)2010: Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE RAS and EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics, Sept 2010; 26-29; Tokyo, Japan; 522-527.
21. De Momi E, Ferrigno G. Robotic and artificial intelligence for keyhole neurosurgery: the ROBOCAST project, a multi-modal autonomous path planner. Proc IME Part H J Eng Med 2010; May; 224(5): 715-727.
22. Jones LA. Matching forces: constant errors and differential thresholds. Perception 1989; 18: 681-687.
23. Pang XD, Tan HZ, Durlach NI. Manual discrimination of force using active finger motion. Perception Psychophys 1991; 49(6): 531-540.
24. Shimoga KB. A survey of perceptual feedback issues in dexterous telemanipulation. I. Finger force feedback. In Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium, 18-22 Sep 1993; p. 263-270.
25. Engh J, Podnar G, Khoo S, Riviere C. Flexible needle steering system for percutaneous access to deep zones of the brain. In Proceedings of IEEE Northeast Bioengineering Conference 2006; 103-104.
26. Ritter RC, Quate EG, Gillies GT, et al. Measurement of friction on straight catheters in in vitro brain and phantom material. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1998; Apr; 45(4): 476-485.
27. Howard MA III, Abkes BA, Ollendieck MC, et al. Measurement of the force required to move a neurosurgical probe through in vivo human brain tissue. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1999; Jul; 46(7): 891-894.
28. Wittek A, Dutta-Roy T, Taylor Z, et al. Subject-specific non-linear biomechanical model of needle insertion into brain. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng 2008; Apr; 11(2): 135-146.
29. Shergold OA, Fleck NA. Experimental investigation into the deep penetration of soft solids by sharp and blunt punches, with application to the piercing of skin. J Biomech Eng 2005; Oct; 127(5): 838-848.
30. Abolhassani N, Patel R, Moallem M. Needle insertion into soft tissue: A survey. Med Eng Phys. 2007; May; 29(4): 413-431.
31. Hochman MN, Friedman MJ. An in vitro study of needle force penetration comparing a standard linear insertion to the new bidirectional rotation insertion technique. Quintessence Int 2001; 32(10): 789-796.
32. Abolhassani N, Patel R, Moallem M. Trajectory generation for robotic needle insertion in soft tissue. In IEMBS 2004: Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, 26th Annual International Conference of the IEEE, Sept 2004; 2730-2733.
33. Riviere CN, Gangloff J, de Mathelin M. Robotic compensation of biological motion to enhance surgical accuracy. Proceedings of the IEEE 2006; Sep; 94(9): 1705-1716.
34. Dell'Acqua R, Turatto M. Cross-modal attentional deficits in processing tactile stimulation. Perception Psychophys 2001; 63(5): 777-789.
35. Wagner CR, Howe RD. Force feedback benefit depends on experience in multiple degree of freedom robotic surgery task. IEEE Trans Robot 2007; Dec; 23(6): 1235-1240.
36. Malone HR. Simulation in Neurosurgery: a review of computer-based simulation environments and their surgical applications. Neurosurgery 2010; Oct; 67(4): 1105-1116.