Advertisement

Surgical Motion Adaptive Robotic Technology (S.M.A.R.T): Taking the Motion out of Physiological Motion

  • Anshul Thakral
  • Jeffrey Wallace
  • Damian Tomlin
  • Nikesh Seth
  • Nitish V. Thakor
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2208)

Abstract

In precision computer and robotic assisted minimally invasive surgical procedures, such as retinal microsurgery or cardiac bypass surgery, physiological motion can hamper the surgeon’s ability to effectively visualize and approach the target site. Current day stabilizers used for minimally invasive cardiac surgery often stretch or pull at the tissue, causing subsequent tissue damage. In this study, we investigated novel means of modeling Z-axis physiological motion and demonstrate how these models could be used to compensate for this motion in order to provide a more stable surgical field. The Z-axis motion compensation is achieved by using a fiber-optic laser sensor to obtain precise displacement measurements. Using a weighted time series modeling technique, modeling of rodent chest wall motion and heart wall motion was accomplished. Our computational methods for modeling physiological motion open the door for applications using high speed, high precision actuators to filter motion out and provide for a stable surgical field.

Keywords

Physiological Motion Invasive Cardiac Surgery Beating Heart Surgery Heart Wall Motion Adaptive Cancel 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Ko, W. Advances in Cardiovascular Surgery–Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery. in 1997 CAMS Semiannual Scientific meeting. 1997. New York.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Matsuda, H., et al., Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery: Current Status and Perpective. Artificial Organs, 1998. 22(9): p. 759–64.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mayer, P.W., Relative Motion Cancelling, in Patent No. 5871017. 1999: US.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rousou, J.A., et al., Fenestrated felt facilitates anastomotic stability and safety in & “off-pump” coronary bypass. Ann Thorac Surg, 1999. 68(1): p. 272–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jansen, E.W.L., et al., Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Without Cardiopulmonary Bypass Using the Octopus Method: Results in the First One Hundred Patients. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 1998. 116(1): p. 60–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Trejos, A.L., et al. On the Feasibility of a Moving Support for Surgery on the Beating Heart. in Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention–MICCAI’99: Second International Conference. 1999. Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Widrow, B. and S.D. Stearns, Adaptive signal processing. Prentice-Hall signal processing series. 1985, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. xviii, 474.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Walter, D.O., A posteriori Wiener Filtering of average evoked responses. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol, 1968.:Suppl(27): p. 61+.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Widrow, B. and J.M.E. Hoff. Adaptive switching circuites. in IRE WESCON Conv. Rec. 1960.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Metz, S., An Intraoperative Monitoring System for the analysis of Evoked Potentials, in Biomedical Engineering. 1999, Johns Hopkins University: Baltimore. p. 159.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vaz, C.A. and N.V. Thakor, Adaptive Fourier estimation of time-varying evoked potentials. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng, 1989. 36(4): p. 448–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Riviere, C.N., Adaptive suppression of tremor for improved human-machine control., in Biomedical Engineering. 1995, Johns Hopkins Univesity: Baltimore, Md.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Vaz, C., X. Kong, and N.V. Thakor, An adaptive estimation of periodic signals using a Fourier linear combiner. IEEE Transactions in Signal Processing, 1994. 42: p. 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Riviere, C.N., R.S. Rader, and N.V. Thakor, Adaptive canceling of physiological tremor for improved precision in microsurgery. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng, 1998. 45(7): p. 839–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gresty, M. and D. Buckwell, Spectral analysis of tremor: understanding the results. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry, 1990. 53(11): p. 976–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kwong, R. and E. Johnston, A Variable Step Size LMS Algorithm. IEEE Transactions in Signal Processing, 1992. 40(7): p. 1633–1642.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anshul Thakral
    • 1
  • Jeffrey Wallace
    • 1
  • Damian Tomlin
    • 1
  • Nikesh Seth
    • 1
  • Nitish V. Thakor
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Biomedical Engineering, Engineering Research Center for Computer Integrated Surgical Systems and TechnologyThe Johns Hopkins School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations