Advertisement

Experimental validation of robot-assisted cardiovascular catheterization: model-based versus model-free control

  • Xiaomei Wang
  • Kit-Hang Lee
  • Denny K. C. Fu
  • Ziyang Dong
  • Kui Wang
  • Ge Fang
  • Su-Lin Lee
  • Alex P. W. Lee
  • Ka-Wai Kwok
Original Article
  • 169 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

In cardiac electrophysiology, a long and flexible catheter is delivered to a cardiac chamber for the treatment of arrhythmias. Although several robot-assisted platforms have been commercialized, the disorientation in tele-operation is still not well solved. We propose a validation platform for robot-assisted cardiac EP catheterization, integrating a customized MR Safe robot, a standard clinically used EP catheter, and a human–robot interface. Both model-based and model-free control methods are implemented in the platform for quantitative evaluation and comparison.

Methods

The model-based and model-free control methods were validated by subject test (ten participants), in which the subjects have to perform a simulated radiofrequency ablation task using both methods. A virtual endoscopic view of the catheter is also provided to enhance hand-to-eye coordination. Assessment indices for targeting accuracy and efficiency were acquired for the evaluation.

Results

(1) Accuracy: The average distance measured from catheter tip to the closest lesion target during ablation of model-free method was 19.1% shorter than that of model-based control. (2) Efficiency: The model-free control reduced the total missed targets by 35.8% and the maximum continuously missed targets by 46.2%, both indices corresponded to a low p value (\(\le 0.05\)).

Conclusion

The model-free method performed better in terms of both accuracy and efficiency, indicating the model-free control could adapt to soft interaction with environment, as compared with the model-based control that does not consider contacts.

Keywords

Cardiac electrophysiology Robotic catheterization Model-based control Model-free control Endoscopic view MR Safe 

Notes

Funding

This work is supported in part by the Croucher Foundation, the Research Grants Council (RGC) of Hong Kong (17202317, 17227616 and 27209515), Aptorum Group Limited and Signate Life Sciences Limited.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. This article does not contain patient data.

References

  1. 1.
    Feng Y, Guo Z, Dong Z, Zhou XY, Kwok KW, Ernst S, Lee SL (2017) An efficient cardiac mapping strategy for radiofrequency catheter ablation with active learning. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 12(7):1199–1207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Josephson M (2008) Clinical cardiac electrophysiology. Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rafii-Tari H, Payne CJ, Yang GZ (2014) Current and emerging robot-assisted endovascular catheterization technologies: a review. Ann Biomed Eng 42(4):697–715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wongcharoen W, Tsao HM, Wu MH, Tai CT, Chang SL, Lin YJ, Lo LW, Chen YJ, Sheu MH, Chang CY, Chen SA (2006) Morphologic characteristics of the left atrial appendage, roof, and septum: implications for the ablation of atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 17(9):951–956CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lardo AC, McVeigh ER, Jumrussirikul P, Berger RD, Calkins H, Lima J, Halperin HR (2000) Visualization and temporal/spatial characterization of cardiac radiofrequency ablation lesions using magnetic resonance imaging. Circulation 102(6):698–705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Raval AN, Karmarkar PV, Guttman MA, Ozturk C, DeSilva R, Aviles RJ, Wright VJ, Schenke WH, Atalar E, McVeigh ER, Lederman RJ (2006) Real time MRI guided atrial septal puncture and balloon septostomy in swine. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 67(4):637–643CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Razavi R, Hill DLG, Keevil SF, Miquel ME, Muthurangu V, Hegde S, Rhode K, Barnett M, Vaals JV, Hawkes DJ, Baker E (2003) Cardiac catheterisation guided by MRI in children and adults with congenital heart disease. Lancet 362(9399):1877–1882CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lee KH, Fu KC, Dong Z , Leong MCW, Cheung CL, Lee APW, Luk W , Kwok KW (2018) MR-safe robotic platform for MRI-guided intra-cardiac catheterization. IEEE ASME Trans Mechatron https://doi.org/10.1109/TMECH.2018.2801787
  9. 9.
    Kwok KW, Lee KH, Chen Y, Wang W, Hu Y, Chow GCT, Zhang HS, Stevenson WG, Kwong RY, Luk W, Schmidt EJ, Tse Z (2014) Interfacing fast multi-phase cardiac image registration with MRI-based catheter tracking for MRI-guided electrophysiological ablative procedures. Circulation 130:A18568Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bock M, Muller S, Zuehlsdorff S, Speier P, Fink C, Hallscheidt P, Umathum R, Semmler W (2006) Active catheter tracking using parallel MRI and real time image reconstruction. Magn Reson Med 55(6):1454–1459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kwok KW, Chen Y, Chau TCP, Luk W, Nilsson K, Schmidt E, Tse Z (2014) MRI-based visual and haptic catheter feedback: simulating a novel system’s contribution to efficient and safe MRI-guided cardiac electrophysiology procedures. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 16(1):O50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Webster RJ III, Jones BA (2010) Design and kinematic modeling of constant curvature continuum robots: a review. Int J Robot Res 29(13):1661–1683CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ganji Y, Janabi-Sharifi F (2009) Catheter kinematics for intracardiac navigation. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 56(3):621–632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ganji Y, Janabi-Sharifi F (2007) Kinematic characterization of a cardiac ablation catheter. In: 2007 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS), pp 1876–1881Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Liu T, Cavusoglu MC (2014) Three dimensional modeling of an MRI actuated steerable catheter system. In: 2014 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA), pp 4393–4398Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Greigarn T, Cavusoglu MC (2014) Task-space motion planning of MRI-actuated catheters for catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. In: 2014 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS), pp 3476–3482Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Back J, Lindenroth L, Rhode K, Liu H (2017) Model-free position control for cardiac ablation catheter steering using electromagnetic position tracking and tension feedback. Front Robot AI 4:17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yip MC, Camarillo DB (2016) Model-less hybrid position/force control: a minimalist approach for continuum manipulators in unknown, constrained environments. IEEE Robot Autom Lett 1(2):844–851CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yip MC, Camarillo DB (2014) Model-less feedback control of continuum manipulators in constrained environments. IEEE Trans Robot 30(4):880–889CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kern MJ, Sorajja P, Lim MJ (2015) Cardiac catheterization handbook. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 273–286Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wang W, Dumoulin CL, Viswanathan AN, Tse Z, Mehrtash A, Loew W, Norton I, Tokuda J, Seethamraju RT, Kapur T, Damato AL, Cormack RA, Schmidt EJ (2015) Real time active MR tracking of metallic stylets in MR guided radiation therapy. Magn Reson Med 73(5):1803–1811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hoyle RH (1999) Statistical strategies for small sample research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, p 33Google Scholar

Copyright information

© CARS 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xiaomei Wang
    • 1
  • Kit-Hang Lee
    • 1
  • Denny K. C. Fu
    • 1
  • Ziyang Dong
    • 1
  • Kui Wang
    • 1
  • Ge Fang
    • 1
  • Su-Lin Lee
    • 2
  • Alex P. W. Lee
    • 3
  • Ka-Wai Kwok
    • 1
  1. 1.The Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of Hong KongPokfulamHong Kong
  2. 2.The Department of ComputingImperial College LondonLondonUK
  3. 3.Prince of Wales HospitalThe Chinese University of Hong KongShatinHong Kong

Personalised recommendations