understanding effect and the more likely users will become despondent. These metrics should also include measures of technical and clinical success, with comparisons to the “pre-robotic” state.


Figure 1. The likelihood of adoption of new platform technology like medical robotics in IR can be defined by the equation represented. This formula should drive quality metrics in evaluating new technology and providing standardization for the literature.


statements for which the technology is being deployed.


To be effective, medical robotic technology must address what is described as the “core four” needs:


1. Automation: mitigating frequent labor-intensive or inconsistent tasks


2. Augmentation: improving human capabilities of focus, attending, fine-motor movement, degrees of freedom and capabilities


3. Democratization: ensuring consistent high-quality delivery of procedural technique/therapy regardless of operator, experience, location, or patient


4. Trailblazing: creating new diagnostic or therapeutic options for patients by altering the risk/benefit ratio


We define two subcategories of medical robotics in IR: 1) percutaneous and 2) endovascular. Presently, our institution has deployed a percutaneous robot for CT-guided procedures and has done extensive research on the utilization of endovascular robots.


Robotics in action: What’s the measure of success? As medical robotics are deployed in IR and image-guided medicine, it is crucial that institutions develop standardized systems for evaluating the impact of this technology on practice. As demonstrated in Figure 1, the likelihood of adoption is directly related to the pain of the current state and the speed of visualization of impact over the friction of adoption and the unexpected outcome rate.


32 IRQ | SUMMER 2023


• Pain of the current state: This concept is best defined as the clinical-needs driven problem statement. This could include the four targets of medical robotics as previously defined. Given the current state of IR as described above, the most pressing concern is the ability to perform more with the same or fewer resources effectively and safely. Thus, metrics measured should include number of procedures, procedure and table time, radiation dose, and the amount of time proceduralists wear lead.


As medical robotics are deployed in IR and image-guided medicine, it is crucial that institutions develop standardized systems for evaluating the impact of this technology on practice.


• Speed of visualization of impact: This concept emphasizes the importance of a dashboard to provide feedback updates. If a robot was deployed for a specific or primary reason (such as improved efficiency/optimization), proceduralists must receive feedback about the deployment impact on this outcome in a timely manner. The longer it takes for this feedback to be provided, the greater the costs to deployment without


• Friction of adoption: This concept epitomizes the “learning curve” to the platform technology. One feature that needs to be addressed specifically for any highly skilled proceduralists involves assessing how different this technology is from the current state. Can an endovascular robot be controlled like a normal guidewire until the challenge is reached or must it be controlled in a completely different manner from the start? How complex is the setup, use and breakdown? The technology may be very frustrating to an experienced proceduralist in the first use or first several uses. How many times, on average, does it take to reach “steady-state” optimization? Every proceduralist, as well, has a threshold of tolerance of what it takes to reach that steady state.


• Unexpected outcome rate: This concept involves assessing the adverse event rate with use of medical robotics compared to the rate with conventional approaches. It also involves addressing how often the new platform technology does not function as expected (such as if the robot stops working mid-procedure and what is required to convert the procedure to a conventional approach).


Conclusion In summary, IR and image-guided medicine are poised to embark on a new era of medical robotics, directed at the challenges we face but inspired by the opportunities it creates to provide new access and opportunities for patients. Integration into practice will take culture change with buy-in from all key stakeholders (physicians, residents, advanced practice providers, administrators, technologists and nurses). Emphasis of clinical needs will ensure timely and effective use of this platform technology.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40