skip to main content
10.1145/2506095.2506137acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesairConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Towards Cognitive Medical Robotics in Minimal Invasive Surgery

Authors Info & Claims
Published:04 July 2013Publication History

ABSTRACT

Up to date, medical robots for minimal invasive surgery do not provide assistance appropriate to the workflow of the intervention. A simple concept of a cognitive system is presented, which is derived from a classic closed-loop control. As implementation, we present a cognitive medical robot system using lightweight robots with redundant kinematics. The robot system includes several control modes and human-machine interfaces. We focus on describing knowledge acquisition about the workflow of an intervention and present two example applications utilizing the acquired knowledge: autonomous camera guidance and planning of minimal invasive port (trocar) positions in combination with an initial robot setup. Port planning is described as optimization problem. The autonomous camera system includes a mid-term movement prediction of the ongoing intervention. The cognitive approach to a medical robot system includes taking the environment into account. The goal is to create a system that acts as a human assistant, who perceives the situation, understands the context based on his knowledge and acts appropriate.

References

  1. L. Adhami. An architecture for computer integrated minimal-invasive surgery: focus on optimal planning. PhD thesis, Paris: Ècole des Mines de Paris, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. J. R. Anderson. The architecture of cognition, volume 5. Lawrence Erlbaum, 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. A. Casals, J. Amat, and E. Laporte. Automatic guidance of an assistant robot in laparoscopic surgery. In Robotics and Automation, 1996. Proc 1996 IEEE Int Conf on, volume 1, pages 895--900. IEEE, 1996.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. È. Coste-Manière, L. Adhami, F. Mourgues, and A. Carpentier. Planning, simulation, and augmented reality for robotic cardiac procedures: The stars system of the chir team. In Seminars in thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, volume 15, pages 141--156. Elsevier, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. H. Feußner, S. Can, A. Fiolka, A. Schneider, and D. Wilhelm. Leistungsfähigkeit, risiken und vorteile des einsatzes der robotik in medizinisch-operativen disziplinen. Bundesgesundheitsblatt-Gesundheitsforschung-Gesundheitsschutz, 53(8):831--838, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. U. Hagn, M. Nickl, S. Jörg, G. Passig, T. Bahls, A. Nothhelfer, F. Hacker, L. Le-Tien, A. Albu-Schäffer, R. Konietschke, et al. The DLR MIRO: a versatile lightweight robot for surgical applications. Industrial Robot: An Int Journal, 35(4):324--336, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. J. H. Holland. Studying complex adaptive systems. Journal of Systems Science and Complexity, 19(1):1--8, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. D. Katić, G. Sudra, S. Speidel, G. Castrillon-Oberndorfer, G. Eggers, and R. Dillmann. Knowledge-based situation interpretation for context-aware augmented reality in dental implant surgery. Medical Imaging and Augmented Reality, pages 531--540, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. S.-Y. Ko, J. Kim, W.-J. Lee, and D.-S. Kwon. Surgery task model for intelligent interaction between surgeon and laparoscopic assistant robot. Int Journal of Assitive Robotics and Mechatronics, 8(1):38--46, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. S.-Y. Ko and D.-S. Kwon. A surgical knowledge based interaction method for a laparoscopic assistant robot. In Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2004. ROMAN 2004. 13th IEEE Int Workshop on, pages 313--318. IEEE, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. R. Konietschke. Planning of Workplaces with Multiple Kinematically Redundant Robots. PhD thesis, Ph. D. dissertation, Munich, Germany, 2007, http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver. pl, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. C. Ledermann, J. Hergenhan, O. Weede, and H. Woern. Combining shape sensor and haptic sensors for highly flexible single port system using fiber bragg sensor technology. In Mechatronics and Embedded Systems and Applications (MESA), 2012 IEEE/ASME Int Conf on, pages 196--201. IEEE, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. H. Mönnich, P. Nicolai, T. Beyl, J. Raczkowsky, and H. Wörn. A supervision system for the intuitive usage of a telemanipulated surgical robotic setup. In Robotics and Biomimetics, 2011 IEEE Int Conf on, pages 449--454. IEEE, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. P. Nicolai, T. Beyl, H. Mönnich, J. Raczkowsky, and H. Wörn. Op:Sense - an integrated rapid development environment in the context of robot assisted surgery and operation room sensing. In Robotics and Biomimetics, 2011 IEEE Int Conf on, pages 2421--2422. IEEE, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. A. Trejos and R. Patel. Port placement for endoscopic cardiac surgery based on robot dexterity optimization. In Robotics and Automation, 2005. ICRA 2005. Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE Int Conf on, pages 912--917. IEEE, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. O. Weede, F. Dittrich, H. Wörn, B. Jensen, A. Knoll, D. Wilhelm, M. Kranzfelder, A. Schneider, and H. Feussner. Workflow analysis and surgical phase recognition in minimally invasive surgery. In 2012 IEEE Int Conf on Robotics and Biomimetics, Dec 11--14, 2012, Guangzhou, China, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. O. Weede, A. Kettler, and H. Wörn. Seed throwing optimization: A probabilistic technique for multimodal function optimization. In Future Computing, Service Computation, Cognitive, Adaptive, Content, Patterns, 2009. COMPUTATIONWORLD'09. Computation World:, pages 515--519. IEEE, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. O. Weede, M. Mehrwald, and H. Woern. Knowledge-based system for port placement and robot setup optimization in minimally invasive surgery. In Robot Control, volume 10, pages 722--728, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. O. Weede, H. Mönnich, B. Müller, and H. Wörn. An intelligent and autonomous endoscopic guidance system for minimally invasive surgery. In Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2011 IEEE Int Conf on, pages 5762--5768. IEEE, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. O. Weede, S. Zimmermann, B. Hein, and H. Wörn. Evaluation of seed throwing optimization meta heuristic in terms of performance and parallelizability. In FUTURE COMPUTING 2011, The Third Int Conf on Future Computational Technologies and Applications, pages 92--99, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Towards Cognitive Medical Robotics in Minimal Invasive Surgery

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        AIR '13: Proceedings of Conference on Advances In Robotics
        July 2013
        366 pages
        ISBN:9781450323475
        DOI:10.1145/2506095

        Copyright © 2013 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 4 July 2013

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate69of140submissions,49%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader