Robotics for Minimally Invasive Surgery: A Historical Review from the Perspective of Kinematics

  • Chin-Hsing Kuo
  • Jian S Dai

Abstract

Since the widespread introduction of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in late 1989, the minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has been rapidly developed and applied to many classes of traditional surgeries. Along with the germination of the first surgical robot in 1985, it was not until April 1991 that the first roboticallyassisted MIS was clinically applied to patients in a minimally invasive prostate surgery. Therefore, this paper is devoted to reviewing the development of robotics from the perspective of kinematics in MIS during the past twenty years taking account of the kinematic structures of the manipulator design of the robots. An exclusively kinematic geometry, namely the “remote center-of-motion”, for MIS is reviewed by which a classification of MIS robots is concluded.

Keywords

Minimally invasive surgery Surgical robot Remote center-ofmotion Kinematics 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Vierra M (1995) Minimally Invasive Surgery, Annual Review of Medicine, Vol. 46, pp. 147–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Davies B (2000) A Review of Robotics in Surgery, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part H-Journal of Engineering in Medicine, Vol. 214, No. 1, pp. 129–140.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kwoh YS, Hou J, et al. (1988) A Robot with Improved Absolute Positioning Accuracy for CT Guided Stereotactic Brain Surgery, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, Vol. 35, No. 2, pp. 153–160.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Taylor RH, Stoianovici D (2003) Medical Robotics in Computer-Integrated Surgery, IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, Vol. 19, No. 5, pp. 765–781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sackier JM, Wang Y (1996) Robotically Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery: From Concept to Development, in Taylor RH, Lavallèe S, et al., Eds, Computer-Integrated Surgery: Technology and Clinical Applications, Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press, pp. 577–580.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ewing DR, Pigazzi A, et al. (2004) Robots in the Operating Room—The History, Surgical Innovation, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 63–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ghodoussi M, Butner SE, Wang Y (2002) Robotic Surgery—The Transatlantic Case, Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Washington, DC, 11–15 May, pp. 1882–1888.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
  9. 9.
    Guthart GS, Salisbury JK, Jr. (2000) The Intuitive™ Telesurgery System: Overview and Application, Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, San Francisco, California, 24–28 April, pp. 618–621.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Davies BL, Hibberd RD, et al. (1996) A Clinically Applied Robot for Prostatectomies, in Taylor RH, Lavallèe S, et al., Eds, Computer-Integrated Surgery: Technology and Clinical Applications, Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press, pp. 593–601.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Davies B, Starkie S, et al. (2000) Neurobot: A Special-Purpose Robot for Neurosurgery, Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, San Francisco, California, 24–28 April, pp. 4103–4108.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Intuitive Surgical Inc., http://www.intuitivesurgical.com/
  13. 13.
    Taylor RH, Funda J, et al. (1996) A Telerobotic Assistant for Laparoscopic Surgery, in Taylor RH, Lavallèe S, et al., Eds, Computer-Integrated Surgery: Technology and Clinical Applications, Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press, pp. 581–592.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Taylor R, Jensen P, et al. (1999) A Steady-Hand Robotic System for Microsurgical Augmentation, The International Journal of Robotics Research, Vol. 18, No. 12, pp. 1201–1210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Stoianovici D, Whitcomb LL, et al. (1998) A Modular Surgical Robotic System for Image Guided Percutaneous Procedures, Proceedings of Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention – MICCAI’98, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 11–13 October, pp. 404–410.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schurr MO, Buess G, et al. (2000) Robotics and Telemanipulation Technologies for Endoscopic Surgery: A Review of the ARTEMIS Project, Surgical Endoscopy, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 375–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hata N, Masamune K, et al. (1998) Needle Insertion Manipulator for CT- and MR-Guided Stereotactic Neurosurgery, in Jolesz FA, Young IR, Eds, Interventional MR: Techniques and Clinical Experience, London, Martin Dunitz, pp. 99–106.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kobayashi E, Masamune K, et al. (1999) A New Safe Laparoscopic Manipulator System with a Five-Bar Linkage Mechanism and an Optical Zoom, Computer Aided Surgery, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 182–192.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zemiti N, Morel G, et al. (2007) Mechatronic Design of a New Robot for Force Control in Minimally Invasive Surgery, IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 143–153.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Salcudean SE, Zhu WH, et al. (1999) A Robot System for Medical Ultrasound, The 9th International Symposium of Robotics Research (ISRR’99), Snowbird, Utah, 9–12 October, pp. 195–202.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sanchez D, Black M, Hammond S (2002) A Pivot Point Arm for A Robotic System Used to Perform A Surgical Procedure, European Patent No. 1254642.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pei X, Yu J, et al. (2007) Enumeration and Type Synthesis of One-DOF Remote- Center-of-Motion Mechanisms, Proceedings of 12th IFToMM World Congress, Besançon, France, 18–21 June.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Morley TA, Wallace DT (2005) Roll-Pitch-Roll Surgical Tool, US Patent No. 2005204851.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Taylor RH, Funda J, et al. (1994) Improved Remote Center-of-Motion Robot for Surgery, US Patent No. EP0595291.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rosen J, Brown JD, et al. (2002) The BlueDRAGON – A System for Measuring the Kinematics and the Dynamics of Minimally Invasive Surgical Tools In-Vivo, Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Washington, DC, 11–15 May, pp. 1876–1881.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Baumann R, Maeder W, et al. (1997) The PantoScope: A Spherical Remote- Center-of-Motion Parallel Manipulator for Force Reflection, Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 20–25 April, pp. 718–723.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Stoianovici D, Whitcomb LL, et al. (2003) Remote Center of Motion Robotic System and Method, International Patent No. WO03067341.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schena B (2007) Center Robotic Arm with Five-Bar Spherical Linkage for Endoscopic Camera, International Patent No. WO2007114975.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lum MJH, Rosen J, et al. (2006) Optimization of a Spherical Mechanism for a Minimally Invasive Surgical Robot: Theoretical and Experimental Approaches, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, Vol. 53, No. 7, pp. 1440–1445.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Çavuşoğlu MC, Tendick F, et al. (1999) A Laparoscopic Telesurgical Workstation, IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 728–739.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Berkelman P, Cinquin P, et al. (2002) A Compact, Compliant Laparoscopic Endoscope Manipulator, Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Washington, DC, 11–15 May, pp. 1870–1875.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Stoianovici D, Cleary K, et al. (2003) AcuBot: A Robot for Radiological Interventions, IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, Vol. 19, No. 5, pp. 927–930Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kang H, Wen JT (2001) Robotic Assistants Aid Surgeons During Minimally Invasive Procedures, IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 94–104.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Yasunaga T, Hashizume M, et al. (2003) Remote-Controlled Laparoscope Manipulator System, Naviot™, for Endoscopic Surgery, CARS 2003 – Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery: Proceedings of the 17th International Congress and Exhibition, Lemke HU, Inamura K, et al., Eds, London, United Kingdom, 25–28 June, pp. 678–683.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Loser MH, Navab N (2000) A New Robotic System for Visually Controlled Percutaneous Interventions under CT Fluoroscopy, Proceedings of Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention – MICCAI 2000, Delp SL, DiGoia AM, Jaramaz B, Eds, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 11–14 October, pp. 887–896.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chin-Hsing Kuo
    • 1
  • Jian S Dai
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical Engineering, King’s College LondonUniversity of LondonStrandUK

Personalised recommendations