Impact of robotic assistance on the learning curve in endovascular interventions: exploring the role of operator experience with the CorPath GRX system.

IF 1.2 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Tatjana Dell, Marilia B Voigt, Alexander Isaak, Alexander Boehner, Claus Pieper, Narine Mesropyan, Patrick Kupczyk, Julian Luetkens, Daniel Kuetting
{"title":"Impact of robotic assistance on the learning curve in endovascular interventions: exploring the role of operator experience with the CorPath GRX system.","authors":"Tatjana Dell, Marilia B Voigt, Alexander Isaak, Alexander Boehner, Claus Pieper, Narine Mesropyan, Patrick Kupczyk, Julian Luetkens, Daniel Kuetting","doi":"10.1186/s42155-025-00529-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study investigates how endovascular interventionalists adapt to using a robotic platform, specifically the CorPath GRX Robotic System, and examines the influence of prior manual catheterization experience.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>An in-vitro trial was conducted to assess the adaptation to robot-assisted catheter-guided interventions in comparison to manual catheterization using a neurovascular phantom. Three interventional radiologists (beginner: no manual experience; intermediate: 3 years; expert: 10 years) with varying experience levels performed three corresponding robotic and manual guided superselective catherization tasks with three attempts per position with both approaches. Procedure time and total radiation dose was recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For the beginner reduced intervention times were noted using the robot-assisted approach (mean: 123 s) in comparison to manual catheterization (mean: 257 s; p = 0.008), whilst no differences were seen in between procedure durations for the intermediate (mean: 71 s for manual versus 102 s for robotic; p = 0.388) and expert interventionalist (mean: 30 s for manual versus 42 s for robotic; p = 0.479). The beginner also benefited significantly from robot-assisted procedures with lower emitted total radiation doses (mean: 0.007 Gy for manual versus 0.003 Gy for robotic; p = 0.007), while no significant differences are observed for intermediate (mean: 0.002 Gy for manual versus 0.003 Gy for robotic; p = 0.137) and expert practitioners (mean: 0.0008 Gy for manual versus 0.001 Gy for robotic; p = 0.459).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Robot-assisted platforms accelerate skill acquisition for beginners while maintaining efficiency for experienced practitioners. However, addressing costs and training requirements is essential for wider adoption and optimized outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":52351,"journal":{"name":"CVIR Endovascular","volume":"8 1","pages":"18"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11876475/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CVIR Endovascular","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42155-025-00529-y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This study investigates how endovascular interventionalists adapt to using a robotic platform, specifically the CorPath GRX Robotic System, and examines the influence of prior manual catheterization experience.

Materials and methods: An in-vitro trial was conducted to assess the adaptation to robot-assisted catheter-guided interventions in comparison to manual catheterization using a neurovascular phantom. Three interventional radiologists (beginner: no manual experience; intermediate: 3 years; expert: 10 years) with varying experience levels performed three corresponding robotic and manual guided superselective catherization tasks with three attempts per position with both approaches. Procedure time and total radiation dose was recorded.

Results: For the beginner reduced intervention times were noted using the robot-assisted approach (mean: 123 s) in comparison to manual catheterization (mean: 257 s; p = 0.008), whilst no differences were seen in between procedure durations for the intermediate (mean: 71 s for manual versus 102 s for robotic; p = 0.388) and expert interventionalist (mean: 30 s for manual versus 42 s for robotic; p = 0.479). The beginner also benefited significantly from robot-assisted procedures with lower emitted total radiation doses (mean: 0.007 Gy for manual versus 0.003 Gy for robotic; p = 0.007), while no significant differences are observed for intermediate (mean: 0.002 Gy for manual versus 0.003 Gy for robotic; p = 0.137) and expert practitioners (mean: 0.0008 Gy for manual versus 0.001 Gy for robotic; p = 0.459).

Conclusion: Robot-assisted platforms accelerate skill acquisition for beginners while maintaining efficiency for experienced practitioners. However, addressing costs and training requirements is essential for wider adoption and optimized outcomes.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CVIR Endovascular
CVIR Endovascular Medicine-Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
59
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信