Development of stereo endoscope system with its innovative master interface for continuous surgical operation

BackgroundAlthough robotic laparoscopic surgery has various benefits when compared with conventional open surgery and minimally invasive surgery, it also has issues to overcome and one of the issues is the discontinuous surgical flow that occurs whenever control is swapped between the endoscope system and the operating robot arm system. This can lead to problems such as collision between surgical instruments, injury to patients, and increased operation time. To achieve continuous surgical operation, a wireless controllable stereo endoscope system is proposed which enables the simultaneous control of the operating robot arm system and the endoscope system.MethodsThe proposed system consists of two improved novel master interfaces (iNMIs), a four-degrees of freedom (4-DOFs) endoscope control system (ECS), and a simple three-dimensional (3D) endoscope. In order to simultaneously control the proposed system and patient side manipulators of da Vinci research kit (dVRK), the iNMIs are installed to the master tool manipulators of dVRK system. The 4-DOFs ECS consists of four servo motors and employs a two-parallel link structure to provide translational and fulcrum point motion to the simple 3D endoscope. The images acquired by the endoscope undergo stereo calibration and rectification to provide a clear 3D vision to the surgeon as available in clinically used da Vinci surgical robot systems. Tests designed to verify the accuracy, data transfer time, and power consumption of the iNMIs were performed. The workspace was calculated to estimate clinical applicability and a modified peg transfer task was conducted with three novice volunteers.ResultsThe iNMIs operated for 317 min and moved in accordance with the surgeon’s desire with a mean latency of 5 ms. The workspace was calculated to be 20378.3 cm3, which exceeds the reference workspace of 549.5 cm3. The novice volunteers were able to successfully execute the modified peg transfer task designed to evaluate the proposed system’s overall performance.ConclusionsThe experimental results verify that the proposed 3D endoscope system enables continuous surgical flow. The workspace is suitable for the performance of numerous types of surgeries. Therefore, the proposed system is expected to provide much higher safety and efficacy for current surgical robot systems.

[1]  Y. Li,et al.  A camera calibration technique based on OpenCV , 2010, The 3rd International Conference on Information Sciences and Interaction Sciences.

[2]  Blake Hannaford,et al.  Raven-II: An Open Platform for Surgical Robotics Research , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[3]  Jonathan Liss,et al.  Safety and efficacy of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A prospective analysis of 100 initial patients. , 1991, Annals of surgery.

[4]  Chao He,et al.  Workspace analysis based port placement planning in robotic-assisted cholecystectomy , 2011, 2011 IEEE International Symposium on IT in Medicine and Education.

[5]  Seungwan Ryu,et al.  Soft robot review , 2017 .

[6]  B. Kang,et al.  Comparison of Surgical Outcomes between Robotic and Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: The Learning Curve of Robotic Surgery , 2012, Journal of gastric cancer.

[7]  Fumio Miyazaki,et al.  FAce MOUSe: A novel human-machine interface for controlling the position of a laparoscope , 2003, IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom..

[8]  Tanneguy Redarce,et al.  Mouth gesture and voice command based robot command interface , 2009, 2009 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[9]  M. Bell,et al.  Comparison of outcomes and cost for endometrial cancer staging via traditional laparotomy, standard laparoscopy and robotic techniques. , 2008, Gynecologic oncology.

[10]  Stephen P. Boyd,et al.  Optimizing dominant time constant in RC circuits , 1998, IEEE Trans. Comput. Aided Des. Integr. Circuits Syst..

[11]  A. Lanfranco,et al.  Robotic Surgery: A Current Perspective , 2004, Annals of surgery.

[12]  Masakatsu G. Fujie,et al.  Pupil Variation Applied to the Eye Tracking Control of an Endoscopic Manipulator , 2016, IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters.

[13]  G. Caravaglios,et al.  Robotics in general surgery: personal experience in a large community hospital. , 2003, Archives of surgery.

[14]  Hee Chan Kim,et al.  Pneumatic-type surgical robot end-effector for laparoscopic surgical-operation-by-wire , 2014, BioMedical Engineering OnLine.

[15]  Levente Kovács,et al.  Simulation and control for telerobots in space medicine , 2012 .

[16]  Tatsuo Nakamura,et al.  Hands-free interface for surgical procedures based on foot movement patterns , 2014, 2014 36th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[17]  G. Sung,et al.  Robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty: a pilot study. , 1999, Urology.

[18]  Guang-Zhong Yang,et al.  Gaze contingent articulated robot control for robot assisted minimally invasive surgery , 2008, 2008 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[19]  E. Frost,et al.  Anesthetic care of the patient for robotic surgery. , 2008, Middle East journal of anaesthesiology.

[20]  Kai-Tai Song,et al.  A Study on Speech Recognition Control for a Surgical Robot , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics.

[21]  Won-Ho Shin,et al.  Surgical Robot System for Single-Port Surgery With Novel Joint Mechanism , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[22]  F. Pirozzi,et al.  Advantages and limits of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery: preliminary experience , 2004, Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques.

[23]  Sungwan Kim,et al.  A development of assistant surgical robot system based on surgical-operation-by-wire and hands-on-throttle-and-stick , 2016, BioMedical Engineering OnLine.

[24]  G. Sung,et al.  Robotic laparoscopic surgery: a comparison of the DA Vinci and Zeus systems. , 2001, Urology.

[25]  Stavros Chatzandroulis,et al.  A Reconfigurable Multichannel Capacitive Sensor Array Interface , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement.

[26]  Nicole D. Bouvy,et al.  The end of robot-assisted laparoscopy? A critical appraisal of scientific evidence on the use of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery , 2013, Surgical Endoscopy.

[27]  Thomas M. Krummel,et al.  Robotics in General Surgery , 2008 .

[28]  Ki-Hwan Lee,et al.  Two-port access versus four-port access laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy , 2014, Obstetrics & gynecology science.

[29]  Sachin Kathuria,et al.  Defining the Pros and Cons of Open, Conventional Laparoscopy, and Robot-Assisted Pyeloplasty in a Developing Nation , 2014, Advances in urology.

[30]  Brady W King,et al.  Towards an autonomous robot for camera control during laparoscopic surgery. , 2013, Journal of laparoendoscopic & advanced surgical techniques. Part A.

[31]  A. Gallagher,et al.  Experienced laparoscopic surgeons are automated to the "fulcrum effect": an ergonomic demonstration. , 1999, Endoscopy.

[32]  Barbara L. Bass,et al.  “Chopstick” surgery: a novel technique improves surgeon performance and eliminates arm collision in robotic single-incision laparoscopic surgery , 2009, Surgical Endoscopy.

[33]  Myriam J. Curet,et al.  Introduction to the Robotic System , 2014 .

[34]  Ling Zou,et al.  A method of stereo vision matching based on OpenCV , 2010, 2010 International Conference on Audio, Language and Image Processing.