Surgeon-Centered Analysis of Robot-Assisted Needle Driving Under Different Force Feedback Conditions

Robotic assisted minimally invasive surgery (RAMIS) systems present many advantages to the surgeon and patient over open and standard laparoscopic surgery. However, haptic feedback, which is crucial for the success of many surgical procedures, is still an open challenge in RAMIS. Understanding the way that haptic feedback affects performance and learning can be useful in the development of haptic feedback algorithms and teleoperation control systems. In this study, we examined the performance and learning of inexperienced participants under different haptic feedback conditions in a task of surgical needle driving via a soft homogeneous deformable object—an artificial tissue. We designed an experimental setup to characterize their movement trajectories and the forces that they applied on the artificial tissue. Participants first performed the task in an open condition, with a standard surgical needle holder, followed by teleoperation in one of three feedback conditions: (1) no haptic feedback, (2) haptic feedback based on position exchange, and (3) haptic feedback based on direct recording from a force sensor, and then again with the open needle holder. To quantify the effect of different force feedback conditions on the quality of needle driving, we developed novel metrics that assess the kinematics of needle driving and the tissue interaction forces, and we combined our novel metrics with classical metrics. We analyzed the final teleoperated performance in each condition, the improvement during teleoperation, and the aftereffect of teleoperation on the performance when using the open needle driver. We found that there is no significant difference in the final performance and in the aftereffect between the 3 conditions. Only the two conditions with force feedback presented statistically significant improvement during teleoperation in several of the metrics, but when we compared directly between the improvements in the three different feedback conditions none of the effects reached statistical significance. We discuss possible explanations for the relative similarity in performance. We conclude that we developed several new metrics for the quality of surgical needle driving, but even with these detailed metrics, the advantage of state of the art force feedback methods to tasks that require interaction with homogeneous soft tissue is questionable.

[1]  Dale A. Lawrence.  Stability and transparency in bilateral teleoperation , 1993, IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom..

[2]  L. Santos-Carrerasa,et al.  Influence of force and torque feedback on operator performance in a VR-based suturing task , 2015 .

[3]  Allison M. Okamura,et al.  Uncontrolled Manifold Analysis of Arm Joint Angle Variability During Robotic Teleoperation and Freehand Movement of Surgeons and Novices , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[4]  Jonathan B Dingwell,et al.  Trial-to-trial dynamics and learning in a generalized, redundant reaching task. , 2013, Journal of neurophysiology.

[5]  Allison M. Okamura,et al.  Enhancing Transparency of a Position-Exchange Teleoperator , 2007, Second Joint EuroHaptics Conference and Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems (WHC'07).

[6]  Bijan Shirinzadeh,et al.  An actuated force feedback‐enabled laparoscopic instrument for robotic‐assisted surgery , 2014, The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS.

[7]  M. E. Hagen,et al.  Visual clues act as a substitute for haptic feedback in robotic surgery , 2008, Surgical Endoscopy.

[8]  Ilana Nisky,et al.  Application and Exploration of Sensorimotor Coordination Strategies in Surgical Robotics , 2020, Metrics of Sensory Motor Coordination and Integration in Robots and Animals.

[9]  C D Smith,et al.  Assessing laparoscopic manipulative skills. , 2001, American journal of surgery.

[10]  D. Sternad,et al.  Decomposition of variability in the execution of goal-oriented tasks: three components of skill improvement. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[11]  Allison M. Okamura,et al.  Force & torque feedback vs force only feedback , 2009, World Haptics 2009 - Third Joint EuroHaptics conference and Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems.

[12]  David W. Franklin,et al.  Computational Mechanisms of Sensorimotor Control , 2011, Neuron.

[13]  Michael D. Byrne,et al.  Toward training surgeons with motion-based feedback: Initial validation of smoothness as a measure of motor learning , 2017 .

[14]  Peter Kazanzides,et al.  A Reliable Gravity Compensation Control Strategy for dVRK Robotic Arms With Nonlinear Disturbance Forces , 2019, IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters.

[15]  A. García-Ruiz,et al.  Manual vs robotically assisted laparoscopic surgery in the performance of basic manipulation and suturing tasks. , 1998, Archives of surgery.

[16]  Ilana Nisky,et al.  What Can Spatiotemporal Characteristics of Movements in RAMIS Tell Us? , 2017, ArXiv.

[17]  Ilana Nisky,et al.  Robot-assisted surgery: an emerging platform for human neuroscience research , 2015, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[18]  B. Hannaford,et al.  Skills evaluation in minimally invasive surgery using force/torque signatures , 2000, Surgical Endoscopy.

[19]  Marcia Kilchenman O'Malley,et al.  Smoothness of surgical tool tip motion correlates to skill in endovascular tasks , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems.

[20]  Allison M. Okamura,et al.  Force-Feedback Surgical Teleoperator: Controller Design and Palpation Experiments , 2008, 2008 Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems.

[21]  A. A. Handzel,et al.  Three-dimensional arm movements at constant equi-affine speed , 2009, Cortex.

[22]  S. Maeso,et al.  Efficacy of the Da Vinci Surgical System in Abdominal Surgery Compared With That of Laparoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis , 2010, Annals of surgery.

[23]  P. Rao.  Robotic surgery: new robots and finally some real competition! , 2018, World Journal of Urology.

[24]  A. Okamura,et al.  Effects of robotic manipulators on movements of novices and surgeons , 2014, Surgical Endoscopy.

[25]  Etienne Burdet,et al.  A Robust and Sensitive Metric for Quantifying Movement Smoothness , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[26]  Tamar Flash,et al.  Models of human movement: Trajectory planning and inverse kinematics studies , 2013, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[27]  Allison M. Okamura,et al.  Teleoperated versus open needle driving: Kinematic analysis of experienced surgeons and novice users , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).

[28]  Roger Gassert,et al.  Influence of force and torque feedback on operator performance in a VR-based suturing task , 2010 .

[29]  Blake Hannaford,et al.  Assessment of Tissue Damage due to Mechanical Stresses , 2006 .

[30]  Rajnikant V. Patel,et al.  Robot-assisted Tactile Sensing for Minimally Invasive Tumor Localization , 2009, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[31]  Ana Luisa Trejos,et al.  The role of visual and direct force feedback in robotics‐assisted mitral valve annuloplasty , 2017, The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS.

[32]  Paul J Johnson,et al.  Output control of da Vinci surgical system's surgical graspers. , 2014, The Journal of surgical research.

[33]  B C Touwen,et al.  How normal is variable, or how variable is normal? , 1993, Early human development.

[34]  Elena De Momi,et al.  An Uncontrolled Manifold Analysis of Arm Joint Variability in Virtual Planar Position and Orientation Telemanipulation , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[35]  Ilana Nisky,et al.  Instrument Orientation-Based Metrics for Surgical Skill Evaluation in Robot-Assisted and Open Needle Driving , 2017, ArXiv.

[36]  José de Jesús Rubio,et al.  Learning of operator hand movements via least angle regression to be teached in a manipulator , 2020, Evol. Syst..

[37]  Rajni V. Patel,et al.  The Role of Direct and Visual Force Feedback in Suturing using a 7-DOF Dual-Arm Teleoperated System. , 2016, IEEE transactions on haptics.

[38]  A. Faisal,et al.  Noise in the nervous system , 2008, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[39]  T. Judkins,et al.  Objective evaluation of expert and novice performance during robotic surgical training tasks , 2009, Surgical Endoscopy.

[40]  N. Stergiou,et al.  Human movement variability, nonlinear dynamics, and pathology: is there a connection? , 2011, Human movement science.

[41]  Allison M. Okamura,et al.  Effects of Translational and Gripping Force Feedback are Decoupled in a 4-Degree-of-Freedom Telemanipulator , 2007, Second Joint EuroHaptics Conference and Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems (WHC'07).

[42]  Wei He,et al.  Adaptive Fuzzy Neural Network Control for a Constrained Robot Using Impedance Learning , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems.

[43]  Blake Hannaford,et al.  Stable teleoperation with time-domain passivity control , 2002, IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation.

[44]  Allison M. Okamura,et al.  Effects of haptic and graphical force feedback on teleoperated palpation , 2009, 2009 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[45]  Oussama Khatib,et al.  Springer Handbook of Robotics , 2007, Springer Handbooks.

[46]  R. Muradore,et al.  Robotic Surgery , 2011, IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine.

[47]  Thomas Langø,et al.  European association of endoscopic surgeons (EAES) consensus statement on the use of robotics in general surgery , 2015, Surgical Endoscopy.

[48]  Erlend Fagertun Hofstad,et al.  A study of psychomotor skills in minimally invasive surgery: what differentiates expert and nonexpert performance , 2013, Surgical Endoscopy.

[49]  A. Okamura.  Haptic feedback in robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery , 2009, Current opinion in urology.

[50]  Ferdinando A. Mussa-Ivaldi,et al.  Analytical Study of Perceptual and Motor Transparency in Bilateral Teleoperation , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems.

[51]  Ilana Nisky,et al.  Expertise, Teleoperation, and Task Constraints Affect the Speed-Curvature-Torsion Power Law in RAMIS , 2018, J. Medical Robotics Res..

[52]  Jacobo Sandoval-Gutierrez,et al.  Robust Switched Tracking Control for Wheeled Mobile Robots Considering the Actuators and Drivers , 2018, Sensors.

[53]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Optimal feedback control as a theory of motor coordination , 2002, Nature Neuroscience.

[54]  Blake Hannaford,et al.  Gaussian Process Regression for Sensorless Grip Force Estimation of Cable-Driven Elongated Surgical Instruments , 2017, IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters.

[55]  Nima Enayati,et al.  Haptics in Robot-Assisted Surgery: Challenges and Benefits , 2016, IEEE Reviews in Biomedical Engineering.

[56]  Bernhard Weber,et al.  The Benefits of Haptic Feedback in Telesurgery and Other Teleoperation Systems: A Meta-Analysis , 2015, HCI.

[57]  Yaonan Wang,et al.  Recurrent fuzzy wavelet neural networks based on robust adaptive sliding mode control for industrial robot manipulators , 2019, Neural Computing and Applications.

[58]  Peter Kazanzides,et al.  An open-source research kit for the da Vinci® Surgical System , 2014, 2014 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).

[59]  Bernhard Weber,et al.  The Effects of Force Feedback on Surgical Task Performance: A Meta-Analytical Integration , 2014, EuroHaptics.

[60]  N. Stergiou,et al.  Robotic surgery training and performance , 2005, Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques.

[61]  N. Stergiou,et al.  Gait variability measures reveal differences between multiple sclerosis patients and healthy controls. , 2012, Motor control.

[62]  Allison M. Okamura,et al.  The effect of manipulator gripper stiffness on teleoperated task performance , 2015, 2015 IEEE World Haptics Conference (WHC).

[63]  C Freschi,et al.  Technical review of the da Vinci surgical telemanipulator , 2013, The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS.

[64]  E. Komatsu,et al.  Annual Report 2017 , 2018 .

[65]  Allison M Okamura,et al.  Evaluation of Skin Deformation Tactile Feedback for Teleoperated Surgical Tasks , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Haptics.

[66]  Dagmar Sternad,et al.  Sensitivity of Smoothness Measures to Movement Duration, Amplitude, and Arrests , 2009, Journal of motor behavior.

[67]  Mamoru Mitsuishi,et al.  Impact of network time-delay and force feedback on tele-surgery , 2008, International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery.

[68]  A. Castellanos,et al.  Force Feedback Plays a Significant Role in Minimally Invasive Surgery: Results and Analysis , 2005, Annals of surgery.

[69]  Rajnikant V. Patel,et al.  Quasi-static modeling of the da Vinci instrument , 2014, 2014 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[70]  Allison M. Okamura,et al.  Haptics: The Present and Future of Artificial Touch Sensation , 2018, Annu. Rev. Control. Robotics Auton. Syst..

[71]  D. Oleynikov,et al.  Robotic surgery training and performance , 2006, Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques.

[72]  K. J. Kuchenbecker,et al.  Surgeons and non-surgeons prefer haptic feedback of instrument vibrations during robotic surgery , 2015, Surgical Endoscopy.

[73]  Brian S. Peters,et al.  Review of emerging surgical robotic technology , 2018, Surgical Endoscopy.

[74]  Jose de Jesus Rubio,et al.  Modified optimal control with a backpropagation network for robotic arms , 2012 .

[75]  Alicia Casals,et al.  Towards Retrieving Force Feedback in Robotic-Assisted Surgery: A Supervised Neuro-Recurrent-Vision Approach , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Haptics.

[76]  Peter Kazanzides,et al.  Software Architecture of the Da Vinci Research Kit , 2017, 2017 First IEEE International Conference on Robotic Computing (IRC).

[77]  Allison M. Okamura,et al.  Effect of load force feedback on grip force control during teleoperation: A preliminary study , 2014, 2014 IEEE Haptics Symposium (HAPTICS).