MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057380126 · doi:10.1117/12.2082472

Robot-assisted, ultrasound-guided minimally invasive navigation tool for brachytherapy and ablation therapy: initial assessment

2015· article· en· W2057380126 on OpenAlexaff
Srikanth Bhattad, Abelardo Escoto, Richard Malthaner, Rajni V. Patel

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoft Robotics and Applications
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer visionArtificial intelligenceUltrasoundRobotOrientation (vector space)Brachytherapy3D ultrasoundBiomedical engineeringRadiation therapyRadiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Brachytherapy and thermal ablation are relatively new approaches in robot-assisted minimally invasive interventions for treating malignant tumors. Ultrasound remains the most favored choice for imaging feedback, the benefits being cost effectiveness, radiation free, and easy access in an OR. However it does not generally provide high contrast, noise free images. Distortion occurs when the sound waves pass through a medium that contains air and/or when the target organ is deep within the body. The distorted images make it quite difficult to recognize and localize tumors and surgical tools. Often tools, such as a bevel-tipped needle, deflect from its path during insertion, making it difficult to detect the needle tip using a single perspective view. The shifting of the target due to cardiac and/or respiratory motion can add further errors in reaching the target. This paper describes a comprehensive system that uses robot dexterity to capture 2D ultrasound images in various pre-determined modes for generating 3D ultrasound images and assists in maneuvering a surgical tool. An interactive 3D virtual reality environment is developed that visualizes various artifacts present in the surgical site in real-time. The system helps to avoid image distortion by grabbing images from multiple positions and orientation to provide a 3D view. Using the methods developed for this application, an accuracy of 1.3 mm was achieved in target attainment in an<i> in-vivo </i>experiment subjected to tissue motion. An accuracy of 1.36 mm and 0.93 mm respectively was achieved for the <i>ex-vivo </i>experiments with and without external induced motion. An ablation monitor widget that visualizes the changes during the complete ablation process and enables evaluation of the process in its entirety is integrated.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.370
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicSoft Robotics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207