Advertisement

Coffee: the key to safer image-guided surgery—a granular jamming cap for non-invasive, rigid fixation of fiducial markers to the patient

  • Patrick S. Wellborn
  • Neal P. Dillon
  • Paul T. Russell
  • Robert J. WebsterIII
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

Accurate image guidance requires a rigid connection between tracked fiducial markers and the patient, which cannot be guaranteed by current non-invasive attachment techniques. We propose a new granular jamming approach to firmly, yet non-invasively, connect fiducials to the patient.

Methods

Our granular jamming cap surrounds the head and conforms to the contours of the patient’s skull. When a vacuum is drawn, the device solidifies in a manner conceptually like a vacuum-packed bag of ground coffee, providing a rigid structure that can firmly hold fiducial markers to the patient’s skull. By using the new Polaris Krios optical tracker, we can also use more fiducials in advantageous configurations to reduce registration error.

Results

We tested our new approach against a clinically used headband-based fiducial fixation device under perturbations that could reasonably be expected to occur in a real-world operating room. In bump testing, we found that the granular jamming cap reduced average TRE at the skull base from 2.29 to 0.56 mm and maximum TRE at the same point from 7.65 to 1.30 mm. Clinically significant TRE reductions were also observed in head repositioning and static force testing experiments.

Conclusion

The granular jamming cap concept increases the robustness and accuracy of image-guided sinus and skull base surgery by more firmly attaching fiducial markers to the patient’s skull.

Keywords

Registration Image-guided surgery Endonasal surgery Skull base surgery Granular jamming 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was funded by the National Institutes of Health: Grant R01 EB017467. This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship under Grant No. 144519.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Patrick Wellborn, Neal Dillon, Paul Russell, and Robert Webster III declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

This article does not contain patient data.

References

  1. 1.
    Brown E, Rodenberg N, Amend J, Mozeika A, Steltz E, Zakin MR, Lipson H, Jaeger HM (2010) Universal robotic gripper based on the jamming of granular material. Proc Natl Acad Sci 107(44):18809–18814CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cheng NG, Lobovsky MB, Keating SJ, Setapen, AM, Gero KI, Hosoi AE, Iagnemma KD (2012) Design and analysis of a robust, low-cost, highly articulated manipulator enabled by jamming of granular media. In: IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, pp 4328–4333Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fitzpatrick JM (2010) The role of registration in accurate surgical guidance. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part H J Eng Med 224(5):607–622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fitzpatrick JM, West JB, Maurer CR (1998) Predicting error in rigid-body point-based registration. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 17(5):694–702CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jaeger HM (2015) Celebrating soft matter’s 10th anniversary: toward jamming by design. Soft Matter 11(1):12–27CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jiang A, Xynogalas G, Dasgupta P, Althoefer K, Nanayakkara T (2012) Design of a variable stiffness flexible manipulator with composite granular jamming and membrane coupling. In: IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, pp 2922–2927Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kral F, DiFranco M, Puschban J, Hoermann R, Riechelmann H, Freysinger W (2013) A new nasopharyngeal dynamic reference frame improves accuracy in navigated skull base targets. Surg Innov 21(3):283–289CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Liu AJ, Nagel SR (1998) Nonlinear dynamics: jamming is not just cool any more. Nature 396(6706):21–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lorenz KJ, Frühwald S, Maier H (2006) The use of the brainlab kolibri navigation system in endoscopic paranasal sinus surgery under local anaesthesia. An analysis of 35 cases. HNO 54(11):851–860CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mascott CR, Sol JC, Bousquet P, Lagarrigue J, Lazorthes Y, Lauwers-Cances V (2006) Quantification of true in vivo (application) accuracy in cranial image-guided surgery: influence of mode of patient registration. Neurosurgery 59(1):ONS-146Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Metzger MC, Rafii A, Holhweg-Majert B, Pham AM, Strong B (2007) Comparison of 4 registration strategies for computer-aided maxillofacial surgery. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 137(1):93–99CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mitsui T, Fujii M, Tsuzaka M, Hayashi Y, Asahina Y, Wakabayashi T (2011) Skin shift and its effect on navigation accuracy in image-guided neurosurgery. Radiol Phys Technol 4(1):37–42CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Steltz E, Rodenberg , A M, Brown E, Jaeger HM Jsel (2009) Jamming skin enabled locomotion. In: IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, pp 5672–5677Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stieglitz LH, Fichtner J, Andres R, Schucht P, Krähenbühl AK, Raabe A, Beck J (2013) The silent loss of neuronavigation accuracy: a systematic retrospective analysis of factors influencing the mismatch of frameless stereotactic systems in cranial neurosurgery. Neurosurgery 72(5):796–807CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wellborn PS, Russell PT, Webster III RJ (2016) Can coffee improve surgical robot accuracy? In: Hamlyn symposium on medical robotics, pp 70–71Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    West JB, Fitzpatrick JM, Toms SA, Maurer CR Jr, Maciunas RJ (2001) Fiducial point placement and the accuracy of point-based, rigid body registration. Neurosurgery 48(4):810–817PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Widmann G (2007) Image-guided surgery and medical robotics in the cranial area. Biomed Imaging Interv J 3:e11CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wirz R, Lathrop RA, Godage IS, Burgner-Kahrs J, Russell PT, Webster RJ (2015) Can coffee improve image guidance? In: SPIE medical imaging, international society for optics and photonics, p 941513Google Scholar

Copyright information

© CARS 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringVanderbilt UniversityNashvilleUSA
  2. 2.Department of OtolaryngologyVanderbilt University Medical CenterNashvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations