Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 2/2013

01-02-2013 | Dynamic Manuscript

In vivo validation of a system for haptic feedback of tool vibrations in robotic surgery

Authors: Karlin Bark, William McMahan, Austin Remington, Jamie Gewirtz, Alexei Wedmid, David I. Lee, Katherine J. Kuchenbecker

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 2/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Robotic minimally invasive surgery (RMIS) lacks the haptic (kinesthetic and tactile) cues that surgeons are accustomed to receiving in open and laparoscopic surgery. We previously introduced a method for adding tactile and audio feedback of tool vibrations to RMIS systems, creating sensations similar to what one feels and hears when using a laparoscopic tool. Our prior work showed that surgeons performing box-trainer tasks significantly preferred having this feedback and believed that it helped them concentrate on the task, but we did not know how well our approach would work in a clinically relevant setting. This study constituted the first in vivo test of our system.

Methods

Accelerometers that measure tool vibrations were mounted to the patient-side manipulators of a da Vinci S surgical system. The measured vibrations were recorded and presented to the surgeon through vibrotactile and audio channels while two transperitoneal nephrectomies and two mid-ureteral dissections with uretero-ureterostomy were completed on a porcine model. We examined 30 minutes of resulting video to identify and tag manipulation events, aiming to determine whether our system can measure significant and meaningful tool vibrations during in vivo procedures.

Results

A total of 1,404 manipulation events were identified. Analysis of each event’s accelerations indicated that 82 % of these events resulted in significant vibrations. The magnitude of the accelerations measured for different manipulation events varied widely, with hard contact causing the largest cues.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates the feasibility of providing tool vibration feedback during in vivo RMIS. Significant tool vibrations were reliably measured for the majority of events during standard urological procedures on a porcine model, while real-time, naturalistic tactile and audio tool vibration feedback was provided to the surgeon. The feedback system’s modules were easily implemented outside the sterile field of the da Vinci S and did not interfere with the surgical procedure.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference DiMaio S, Hanuschik M, Kreaden U (2011) The da Vinci Surgical System. In: Rosen J, Hannaford B, Satava RM (eds) Surgical robotics. Springer, New York, pp 199–218CrossRef DiMaio S, Hanuschik M, Kreaden U (2011) The da Vinci Surgical System. In: Rosen J, Hannaford B, Satava RM (eds) Surgical robotics. Springer, New York, pp 199–218CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Bholat OS, Haluck RS, Murray WB, Gorman PJ, Krummel TM (1999) Tactile feedback is present during minimally invasive surgery. J Am Coll Surg 189:349–355PubMedCrossRef Bholat OS, Haluck RS, Murray WB, Gorman PJ, Krummel TM (1999) Tactile feedback is present during minimally invasive surgery. J Am Coll Surg 189:349–355PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Sung GT, Gill IS (2001) Robotic laparoscopic surgery: a comparison of the da Vinci and Zeus systems. Urology 58:893–898PubMedCrossRef Sung GT, Gill IS (2001) Robotic laparoscopic surgery: a comparison of the da Vinci and Zeus systems. Urology 58:893–898PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Meireles O, Horgan S (2011) Applications of surgical robotics in general surgery. In: Rosen J, Hannaford B, Satava RM (eds) Surgical robotics. Springer, New York, pp 791–812CrossRef Meireles O, Horgan S (2011) Applications of surgical robotics in general surgery. In: Rosen J, Hannaford B, Satava RM (eds) Surgical robotics. Springer, New York, pp 791–812CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Costi R, Himpens J, Bruyns J, Cadière GB (2003) Robotic fundoplication: from theoretic advantages to real problems. J Am Coll Surg 197:500–507PubMedCrossRef Costi R, Himpens J, Bruyns J, Cadière GB (2003) Robotic fundoplication: from theoretic advantages to real problems. J Am Coll Surg 197:500–507PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Nezhat F (2008) Minimally invasive surgery in gynecologic oncology: laparoscopy versus robotics. Gynecol Oncol 111:S29–S32PubMedCrossRef Nezhat F (2008) Minimally invasive surgery in gynecologic oncology: laparoscopy versus robotics. Gynecol Oncol 111:S29–S32PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Okamura AM, Verner LN, Yamamoto T, Gwilliam JC, Griffiths PG (2011) Force feedback and sensory substitution for robot-assisted surgery. In: Rosen J, Hannaford B, Satava RM (eds) Surgical robotics. Springer, New York, pp 419–448CrossRef Okamura AM, Verner LN, Yamamoto T, Gwilliam JC, Griffiths PG (2011) Force feedback and sensory substitution for robot-assisted surgery. In: Rosen J, Hannaford B, Satava RM (eds) Surgical robotics. Springer, New York, pp 419–448CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Culjat MO, Bisley JW, King CH, Wottawa C, Fan RE, Dutson EP, Grundfest WS (2011) Tactile feedback in surgical robotics. In: Rosen J, Hannaford B, Satava RM (eds) Surgical robotics. Springer, New York, pp 449–468CrossRef Culjat MO, Bisley JW, King CH, Wottawa C, Fan RE, Dutson EP, Grundfest WS (2011) Tactile feedback in surgical robotics. In: Rosen J, Hannaford B, Satava RM (eds) Surgical robotics. Springer, New York, pp 449–468CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Hagen ME, Meehan JJ, Inan I, Morel P (2008) Visual clues act as a substitute for haptic feedback in robotic surgery. Surg Endosc 22:1505–1508PubMedCrossRef Hagen ME, Meehan JJ, Inan I, Morel P (2008) Visual clues act as a substitute for haptic feedback in robotic surgery. Surg Endosc 22:1505–1508PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Wickens CD (2002) Multiple resources and performance prediction. Theor Issues Ergon Sci 3:159–177CrossRef Wickens CD (2002) Multiple resources and performance prediction. Theor Issues Ergon Sci 3:159–177CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Vitense HS, Jacko JA, Emery VK (2003) Multimodal feedback: an assessment of performance and mental workload. Ergonomics 46:68–87PubMedCrossRef Vitense HS, Jacko JA, Emery VK (2003) Multimodal feedback: an assessment of performance and mental workload. Ergonomics 46:68–87PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Prewett MS, Yang L, Stilson FRB, Gray AA, Coovert MD, Burke J, Redden E, Elliot LR (2006) The benefits of multimodal information: a meta-analysis comparing visual and visual-tactile feedback. Proc Multimodal Interfaces 333–338 Prewett MS, Yang L, Stilson FRB, Gray AA, Coovert MD, Burke J, Redden E, Elliot LR (2006) The benefits of multimodal information: a meta-analysis comparing visual and visual-tactile feedback. Proc Multimodal Interfaces 333–338
13.
go back to reference Cao CGL, Zhou M, Jones DB, Schwaitzberg SD (2007) Can surgeons think and operate with haptics at the same time? J Gastrointest Surg 11:1564–1569PubMedCrossRef Cao CGL, Zhou M, Jones DB, Schwaitzberg SD (2007) Can surgeons think and operate with haptics at the same time? J Gastrointest Surg 11:1564–1569PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Mayer H, Nagy I, Knoll A, Braun EU, Bauernschmitt R, Lange R (2007) Haptic feedback in a telepresence system for endoscopic heart surgery. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ 16:459–470CrossRef Mayer H, Nagy I, Knoll A, Braun EU, Bauernschmitt R, Lange R (2007) Haptic feedback in a telepresence system for endoscopic heart surgery. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ 16:459–470CrossRef
15.
go back to reference van der Meijden O, Schijven M (2009) The value of haptic feedback in conventional and robot-assisted minimal invasive surgery and virtual reality training: a current review. Surg Endosc 23:1180–1190PubMedCrossRef van der Meijden O, Schijven M (2009) The value of haptic feedback in conventional and robot-assisted minimal invasive surgery and virtual reality training: a current review. Surg Endosc 23:1180–1190PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Tan GY, Goel RK, Kaouk JH, Tewari AK (2009) Technological advances in robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery. Urol Clin N Am 36:237–249CrossRef Tan GY, Goel RK, Kaouk JH, Tewari AK (2009) Technological advances in robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery. Urol Clin N Am 36:237–249CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Okamura AM (2009) Haptic feedback in robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery. Curr Opin Urol 19:102–107PubMedCrossRef Okamura AM (2009) Haptic feedback in robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery. Curr Opin Urol 19:102–107PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Wagner CR, Stylopoulos N, Jackson PG, Howe RD (2007) The benefit of force feedback in surgery: examination of blunt dissection. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ 16:252–262CrossRef Wagner CR, Stylopoulos N, Jackson PG, Howe RD (2007) The benefit of force feedback in surgery: examination of blunt dissection. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ 16:252–262CrossRef
19.
go back to reference King CH, Culjat MO, Franco ML, Lewis CE, Dutson EP, Grundfest WS, Bisley JW (2009) Tactile feedback induces reduced grasping force in robotic surgery. IEEE Trans Haptics 2:103–110CrossRef King CH, Culjat MO, Franco ML, Lewis CE, Dutson EP, Grundfest WS, Bisley JW (2009) Tactile feedback induces reduced grasping force in robotic surgery. IEEE Trans Haptics 2:103–110CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Kontarinis DA, Howe RD (1996) Tactile display of vibratory information in teleoperation and virtual environments. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ 4:387–402 Kontarinis DA, Howe RD (1996) Tactile display of vibratory information in teleoperation and virtual environments. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ 4:387–402
21.
go back to reference Johnson KO (2001) The roles and functions of cutaneous mechanoreceptors. Curr Opin Neurobiol 11:455–461PubMedCrossRef Johnson KO (2001) The roles and functions of cutaneous mechanoreceptors. Curr Opin Neurobiol 11:455–461PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Johansson RS, Flanagan JR (2009) Coding and use of tactile signals from the fingertips in object manipulation tasks. Nat Rev Neurosci 10:345–359PubMedCrossRef Johansson RS, Flanagan JR (2009) Coding and use of tactile signals from the fingertips in object manipulation tasks. Nat Rev Neurosci 10:345–359PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference McMahan W, Romano JM, Rahuman AMA, Kuchenbecker KJ (2010) High frequency acceleration feedback significantly increases the realism of haptically rendered textured surfaces. Proc IEEE Haptics Symp 141–148 McMahan W, Romano JM, Rahuman AMA, Kuchenbecker KJ (2010) High frequency acceleration feedback significantly increases the realism of haptically rendered textured surfaces. Proc IEEE Haptics Symp 141–148
24.
go back to reference McMahan W, Gewirtz J, Standish D, Martin P, Kunkel JA, Lilavois M, Wedmid A, Lee DI, Kuchenbecker KJ (2011) Tool contact acceleration feedback for telerobotic surgery. IEEE Trans Haptics 4:210–220CrossRef McMahan W, Gewirtz J, Standish D, Martin P, Kunkel JA, Lilavois M, Wedmid A, Lee DI, Kuchenbecker KJ (2011) Tool contact acceleration feedback for telerobotic surgery. IEEE Trans Haptics 4:210–220CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Hayward V, Maclean KE (2007) Do it yourself haptics: part I. IEEE Robot Automation Mag 14:88–104CrossRef Hayward V, Maclean KE (2007) Do it yourself haptics: part I. IEEE Robot Automation Mag 14:88–104CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Kuchenbecker KJ, Gewirtz J, McMahan W, Satndish D, Martin P, Bohren J, Mendoza PJ, Lee DI (2010) VerroTouch: high-frequency acceleration feedback for telerobotic surgery. In: Kappers AML, van Erp JBF, Bergmann Tiest WM, van der Helm FCT (eds) Haptics: generating and perceiving tangible sensations. Proceedings of EuroHaptics Part I, vol 6191. Springer, New York, pp 189–196 Kuchenbecker KJ, Gewirtz J, McMahan W, Satndish D, Martin P, Bohren J, Mendoza PJ, Lee DI (2010) VerroTouch: high-frequency acceleration feedback for telerobotic surgery. In: Kappers AML, van Erp JBF, Bergmann Tiest WM, van der Helm FCT (eds) Haptics: generating and perceiving tangible sensations. Proceedings of EuroHaptics Part I, vol 6191. Springer, New York, pp 189–196
27.
go back to reference Bethea BT, Okamura AM, Kitagawa M, Fitton TP, Cattaneo SM, Gott VL, Baumgartner WA, Yuh DD (2004) Application of haptic feedback to robotic surgery. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 14:191–195PubMedCrossRef Bethea BT, Okamura AM, Kitagawa M, Fitton TP, Cattaneo SM, Gott VL, Baumgartner WA, Yuh DD (2004) Application of haptic feedback to robotic surgery. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 14:191–195PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Bark K, Gomez ED, Rivera C, McMahan W, Remington AC, Murayama KM, Lee DI, Dumon KR, Williams NN, Kuchenbecker KJ (2012) Surgical instrument vibrations are a construct-valid measure of technical skill in robotic peg transfer and suturing tasks. In: Yang GZ, Darzi A (eds) Proc. Hamlyn Symposium on Medical Robotics, pp 50–51 Bark K, Gomez ED, Rivera C, McMahan W, Remington AC, Murayama KM, Lee DI, Dumon KR, Williams NN, Kuchenbecker KJ (2012) Surgical instrument vibrations are a construct-valid measure of technical skill in robotic peg transfer and suturing tasks. In: Yang GZ, Darzi A (eds) Proc. Hamlyn Symposium on Medical Robotics, pp 50–51
29.
go back to reference Judkins TN, Oleynikov D, Stergiou N (2008) Enhanced robotic surgical training using augmented visual feedback. Surg Innov 15:59–68PubMedCrossRef Judkins TN, Oleynikov D, Stergiou N (2008) Enhanced robotic surgical training using augmented visual feedback. Surg Innov 15:59–68PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
In vivo validation of a system for haptic feedback of tool vibrations in robotic surgery
Authors
Karlin Bark
William McMahan
Austin Remington
Jamie Gewirtz
Alexei Wedmid
David I. Lee
Katherine J. Kuchenbecker
Publication date
01-02-2013
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 2/2013
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2452-8

Other articles of this Issue 2/2013

Surgical Endoscopy 2/2013 Go to the issue