Visual–perceptual mismatch in robotic surgery

BackgroundThe principal objective of the experiment was to analyze the effects of the clutch operation of robotic surgical systems on the performance of the operator. The relative coordinate system introduced by the clutch operation can introduce a visual–perceptual mismatch which can potentially have negative impact on a surgeon’s performance. We also assess the impact of the introduction of additional tactile sensory information on reducing the impact of visual–perceptual mismatch on the performance of the operator.MethodsWe asked 45 novice subjects to complete peg transfers using the da Vinci IS 1200 system with grasper-mounted, normal force sensors. The task involves picking up a peg with one of the robotic arms, passing it to the other arm, and then placing it on the opposite side of the view. Subjects were divided into three groups: aligned group (no mismatch), the misaligned group (10 cm z axis mismatch), and the haptics-misaligned group (haptic feedback and z axis mismatch). Each subject performed the task five times, during which the grip force, time of completion, and number of faults were recorded.ResultsCompared to the subjects that performed the tasks using a properly aligned controller/arm configuration, subjects with a single-axis misalignment showed significantly more peg drops (p = 0.011) and longer time to completion (p < 0.001). Additionally, it was observed that addition of tactile feedback helps reduce the negative effects of visual–perceptual mismatch in some cases. Grip force data recorded from grasper-mounted sensors showed no difference between the different groups.ConclusionsThe visual–perceptual mismatch created by the misalignment of the robotic controls relative to the robotic arms has a negative impact on the operator of a robotic surgical system. Introduction of other sensory information and haptic feedback systems can help in potentially reducing this effect.

[1]  D. Yuh,et al.  Effect of sensory substitution on suture-manipulation forces for robotic surgical systems. , 2005, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[2]  Warren S. Grundfest,et al.  A tactile feedback system for robotic surgery , 2008, 2008 30th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[3]  A. Cestari,et al.  Side docking of the da Vinci robotic system for radical prostatectomy: advantages over traditional docking , 2015, Journal of Robotic Surgery.

[4]  W. Lowrance,et al.  Contemporary open and robotic radical prostatectomy practice patterns among urologists in the United States. , 2012, The Journal of urology.

[5]  G. Ballantyne Robotic surgery, telerobotic surgery, telepresence, and telementoring. Review of early clinical results. , 2002, Surgical endoscopy.

[6]  R. Satava Surgical Robotics: The Early Chronicles: A Personal Historical Perspective , 2002, Surgical laparoscopy, endoscopy & percutaneous techniques.

[7]  Steven D Chang,et al.  Robotic skull base surgery via supraorbital keyhole approach: a cadaveric study. , 2013, Neurosurgery.

[8]  Joan López-Moliner,et al.  The Effects of Visuomotor Calibration to the Perceived Space and Body, through Embodiment in Immersive Virtual Reality , 2015, TAP.

[9]  C. Kang,et al.  Conventional laparoscopic and robot-assisted spleen-preserving pancreatectomy: does da Vinci have clinical advantages? , 2010, Surgical Endoscopy.

[10]  William J Beutler,et al.  The da Vinci Robotic Surgical Assisted Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Technical Development and Case Report , 2013, Spine.

[11]  K. Moorthy,et al.  The benfits of stereoscopic vision in robotic-assisted performance on bench models , 2004, Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques.

[12]  H. Xina,et al.  Laparoscopic surgery , perceptual limitations and force : A review , 2006 .

[13]  Robot-assisted laparoscopic repair of ventral hernia with intracorporeal suturing , 2003, Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques.

[14]  G. Ballantyne Robotic surgery, telerobotic surgery, telepresence, and telementoring , 2002, Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques.

[15]  M. Marohn,et al.  A consensus document on robotic surgery , 2008, Surgical Endoscopy.

[16]  D. Yuh,et al.  Application of haptic feedback to robotic surgery. , 2004, Journal of laparoendoscopic & advanced surgical techniques. Part A.

[17]  Guang-Zhong Yang,et al.  da Vinci robot-assisted keyhole neurosurgery: a cadaver study on feasibility and safety , 2014, Neurosurgical Review.

[18]  G. Fried,et al.  Development and validation of a comprehensive program of education and assessment of the basic fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery. , 2004, Surgery.

[19]  S. Gandevia,et al.  The kinaesthetic senses , 2009, The Journal of physiology.

[20]  N. Gupta,et al.  Critical appraisal of technical problems with robotic urological surgery , 2009, BJU international.

[21]  A. Darzi,et al.  Dexterity enhancement with robotic surgery , 2004, Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques.

[22]  A. Senagore,et al.  Cost and Outcomes in Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery , 2015 .

[23]  M. Schijven,et al.  The value of haptic feedback in conventional and robot-assisted minimal invasive surgery and virtual reality training: a current review , 2009, Surgical Endoscopy.

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

[25]  Katherine J. Kuchenbecker,et al.  Event-Based Haptics with Grip Force Compensation , 2005 .

[26]  Miguel L Franco,et al.  An integrated pneumatic tactile feedback actuator array for robotic surgery , 2009, The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS.

[27]  Jacques Marescaux,et al.  Transatlantic robot-assisted telesurgery , 2001, Nature.

[28]  Catherine E. Lewis,et al.  Tactile Feedback Induces Reduced Grasping Force in Robot-Assisted Surgery , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Haptics.