Computed Tomography Guided Percutaneous Liver Biopsy Using a Robotic Assistance Device—A Corpse Study

Boris Schulz^1*, Katrin Eichler¹, Firas Al-Butmeh¹, Claudia Frellesen¹, Christoph Czerny², Thomas Vogl¹, Stephan Zangos¹

¹Clinic of the Goethe University, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, Frankfurt, Germany.
²Clinic of the Goethe University, Department of Trauma Surgery, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, Frankfurt, Germany.

DOI: 10.4236/ojrad.2015.52014                

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate a robot assistance device for CT-guided percutan liver biopsy. Materials and Methods: The liver of a corpse was equipped with target dummies. Four radiologists used a 16 G needle to perform biopsy of the target region in standard free hand technique and then used a robot system which allowed planning and aligning the trajectory path. Accuracy in terms of needle tip deviation, and time efficiency and radiation exposure in terms of effective dose for the radiologists were measured. Results: For in plane procedures, there was no significant benefit in accuracy when using the robot versus standard technique (4 mm vs. 5.6 mm, p = 0.11); timely effort was worse (443 sec vs. 405 sec, p = 0.64). For angulated punctures, a needle tip of 3.7 mm was measured by using the robotic device (vs. 10.8 mm, p < 0.01); mean biopsy duration was 490 sec (vs. 900 sec, p < 0.01). Mean radiation exposures in freehand technique were 2.4 μSv (in plane procedures) and 10.8 μSv (oblique procedures); the robotic assisted procedures were performed without additional image guidance. Conclusion: The proposed robotic assistance device may be superior for angulated interventions regarding accuracy and timely effort. Furthermore, the zero radiation exposure is a significant benefit for the interventional radiologist.

Keywords

Interventional Radiology, Robotic Assistance, Needle Biopsy, Radiation Dose

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Siragusa, D.A. and Friedman, A.C. (2001) Imaging-Guided Percutaneous Biopsy of Hepatic Masses. Techniques in Vascular and Interventional Radiology, 4, 172-185. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1089-2516(01)90023-X
[2]	Chintapalli, K.N., Montgomery, R.S., Hatab, M., Katabathina, V.S. and Guiy, K. (2012) Radiation Dose Management: Part 1, Minimizing Radiation Dose in CT-Guided Procedures. American Journal of Roentgenology, 198, W347-W351. http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.11.7958
[3]	Cleary, K., Melzer, A., Watson, V., Kronreif, G. and Stoianovici, D. (2006) Interventional Robotic Systems: Applications and Technology State-of-the-Art. Minimally Invasive Therapy & Allied Technologies, 15, 101-113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13645700600674179
[4]	Rasmus, M., Huegli, R.W., Bilecen, D. and Jacob, A.L. (2007) Robotically Assisted CT-Based Procedures. Minimally Invasive Therapy & Allied Technologies, 16, 212-216. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13645700701520636
[5]	Yanof, J., Haaga, J., Klahr, P., Bauer, C., Nakamoto, D., Chaturvedi, A., et al. (2001) CT-Integrated Robot for Interventional Procedures: Preliminary Experiment and Computer-Human Interfaces. Computer Aided Surgery, 6, 352-359. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/10929080109146304
[6]	Wood, B.J., Locklin, J.K., Viswanathan, A., Kruecker, J., Haemmerich, D., Cebral, J., et al. (2007) Technologies for Guidance of Radiofrequency Ablation in the Multimodality Interventional Suite of the Future. Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, 18, 9-24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2006.10.013
[7]	Schulz, B., Eichler, K., Siebenhandl, P., Gruber-Rouh, T., Czerny, C,, Vogl, T.J., et al. (2013) Accuracy and Speed of Robotic Assisted Needle Interventions Using a Modern Cone Beam Computed Tomography Intervention Suite: A Phantom Study. European Radiology, 23, 198-204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-012-2585-0
[8]	Schell, B., Eichler, K., Mack, M.G., Muller, C., Kerl, J.M., Czerny, C., et al. (2012) Robot-Assisted Biopsies in a High-Field MRI System—First Clinical Results (Roboterunterstutzte Punktion in einem Hochfeld-Kernspintomografen—Erste klinische Ergebnisse). Fortschr Rontgenstr, 184, 42-47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0031-1281774
[9]	Zangos, S., Eichler, K., Thalhammer, A., Schoepf, J.U., Costello, P., Herzog, C., et al. (2007) MR-Guided Interventions of the Prostate Gland. Minimally Invasive Therapy & Allied Technologies, 16, 222-229. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13645700701520669
[10]	Penzkofer, T., Isfort, P., Bruners, P., Wiemann, C., Kyriakou, Y., Kalender, W.A., et al. (2010) Robot Arm Based Flat Panel CT-Guided Electromagnetic Tracked Spine Interventions: Phantom and Animal Model Experiments. European Radiology, 20, 2656-2662. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-010-1837-0
[11]	Pfleiderer, S.O., Marx, C., Vagner, J., Franke, R.P., Reichenbach, J.R. and Kaiser, W.A. (2005) Magnetic Resonance-Guided Large-Core Breast Biopsy inside a 1.5-T Magnetic Resonance Scanner Using an Automatic System: In Vitro Experiments and Preliminary Clinical Experience in Four Patients. Investigative Radiology, 40, 458-463. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.rli.0000167423.27180.54
[12]	Tovar-Arriaga, S., Tita, R., Pedraza-Ortega, J.C., Gorrostieta, E. and Kalender, W.A. (2011) Development of a Robotic FD-CT-Guided Navigation System for Needle Placement—Preliminary Accuracy Tests. The International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery, 7, 225-236. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rcs.393
[13]	Schulz, B., Heidenreich, R., Heidenreich, M., Eichler, K., Thalhammer, A., Naeem, N.N., et al. (2012) Radiation Exposure to Operating Staff during Rotational Flat-Panel Angiography and C-Arm Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CT) Applications. European Journal of Radiology, 81, 4138-4142. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.01.010