Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Robotic Surgery 1/2022

Open Access 01-02-2022 | Original Article

Impact of network performance on remote robotic-assisted endovascular interventions in porcine model

Authors: Peter Legeza, Gavin W. Britz, Alpesh Shah, Kalyna Sconzert, John-Michael Sungur, Ponraj Chinnadurai, Kavya Sinha, Alan B. Lumsden

Published in: Journal of Robotic Surgery | Issue 1/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Remote robotic-assisted endovascular interventions require real-time control of the robotic system to conduct precise device navigation. The delay (latency) between the input command and the catheter response can be affected by factors such as network speed and distance. This study evaluated the effect of network latency on robotic-assisted endovascular navigation in three vascular beds using in-vivo experimental model. Three operators performed femoral, carotid, and coronary endovascular robotic navigation blinded from the hybrid room with the prototype remote-enabled CorPath GRX system in a porcine model. Navigation was performed to different targets with randomly assigned network latencies from 0 to 1000 ms. Outcome measurements included navigation success, navigation time, perceived lag (1 = imperceptible, 5 = too long), and procedural impact scored by the operators (1 = no impact, 5 = unacceptable). Robotic-assisted remote endovascular navigation was successful in all 65 cases (9 femoral, 38 external carotid, 18 coronary). Guidewire times were not significantly different across the simulated network latency times. Compared to 0 ms added latency, both the procedural impact and perceived lag scores were significantly higher when the added latency was 400 ms or greater (< 0.01). Remote endovascular intervention was feasible in all studied anatomic regions. Network latency of 400 ms or above is perceptible, although acceptable to operators, which suggests that remote robotic-assisted femoral, carotid or coronary arterial interventions should be performed with network latency below 400 ms to provide seamless remote device control.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Weisz G, Metzger DC, Caputo RP et al (2013) Safety and feasibility of robotic percutaneous coronary intervention: PRECISE (percutaneous robotically-enhanced coronary intervention) study. J Am Coll Cardiol 61:1596–1600CrossRef Weisz G, Metzger DC, Caputo RP et al (2013) Safety and feasibility of robotic percutaneous coronary intervention: PRECISE (percutaneous robotically-enhanced coronary intervention) study. J Am Coll Cardiol 61:1596–1600CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Madder RD, VanOosterhout S, Mulder A et al (2017) Impact of robotics and a suspended lead suit on physician radiation exposure during percutaneous coronary intervention. Cardiovasc Revascularization Med 18:190–196CrossRef Madder RD, VanOosterhout S, Mulder A et al (2017) Impact of robotics and a suspended lead suit on physician radiation exposure during percutaneous coronary intervention. Cardiovasc Revascularization Med 18:190–196CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Madder RD, VanOosterhout S, Mulder A et al (2019) Network latency and long-distance robotic telestenting: exploring the potential impact of network delays on telestenting performance. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 95:914–919CrossRef Madder RD, VanOosterhout S, Mulder A et al (2019) Network latency and long-distance robotic telestenting: exploring the potential impact of network delays on telestenting performance. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 95:914–919CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Madder RD, VanOosterhout S, Mulder A et al (2019) Feasibility of robotic telestenting over long geographic distances: a pre-clinical ex vivo and in vivo study. EuroIntervention 15:510–512CrossRef Madder RD, VanOosterhout S, Mulder A et al (2019) Feasibility of robotic telestenting over long geographic distances: a pre-clinical ex vivo and in vivo study. EuroIntervention 15:510–512CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Patel TM, Shah SC, Pancholy SB (2019) Long distance tele-robotic-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention: a report of first-in-human experience. EClinicalMedicine 14:53–58CrossRef Patel TM, Shah SC, Pancholy SB (2019) Long distance tele-robotic-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention: a report of first-in-human experience. EClinicalMedicine 14:53–58CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Caputo R, Lesser A, Simons A (2018) Feasibility of robotic percutaneous renal artery revascularization. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 8:S35–S36CrossRef Caputo R, Lesser A, Simons A (2018) Feasibility of robotic percutaneous renal artery revascularization. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 8:S35–S36CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Mahmud E, Schmid F, Kalmar P et al (2016) Feasibility and safety of robotic peripheral vascular interventions: results of the RAPID trial. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 9:2058–2064CrossRef Mahmud E, Schmid F, Kalmar P et al (2016) Feasibility and safety of robotic peripheral vascular interventions: results of the RAPID trial. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 9:2058–2064CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Pereira VM, Cancelliere NM, Nicholson P et al (2020) First-in- human, robotic-assisted neuroendovascular intervention. J Neurointervent Surg 12:338–340CrossRef Pereira VM, Cancelliere NM, Nicholson P et al (2020) First-in- human, robotic-assisted neuroendovascular intervention. J Neurointervent Surg 12:338–340CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Marescaux J, Leroy J, Gagner M et al (2001) Transatlantic robot-assisted telesurgery. Nature 413:379–380CrossRef Marescaux J, Leroy J, Gagner M et al (2001) Transatlantic robot-assisted telesurgery. Nature 413:379–380CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Impact of network performance on remote robotic-assisted endovascular interventions in porcine model
Authors
Peter Legeza
Gavin W. Britz
Alpesh Shah
Kalyna Sconzert
John-Michael Sungur
Ponraj Chinnadurai
Kavya Sinha
Alan B. Lumsden
Publication date
01-02-2022
Publisher
Springer London
Published in
Journal of Robotic Surgery / Issue 1/2022
Print ISSN: 1863-2483
Electronic ISSN: 1863-2491
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-021-01196-6

Other articles of this Issue 1/2022

Journal of Robotic Surgery 1/2022 Go to the issue