Research Papers

Inductive Sensing to Detect Tissue Thickness Between Magnets for Potential Application in Magnetic Compression Based Anastomosis

[+] Author and Article Information
Anupama Arun

Department of Surgery,
University of California San Francisco,
San Francisco, CA 94143;
Department of Bioengineering and
Therapeutic Sciences,
University of California San Francisco,
San Francisco, CA 94143
e-mail: anupama.arun@ucsf.edu

Brandon Gaston, Dillon Kwiat, Jill Imamura-Ching, Richard Fechter, Michael Harrison

Department of Surgery,
University of California San Francisco,
San Francisco, CA 94143

Shijie Chen, Hao Jiang

School of Electrical Engineering,
San Francisco State University,
San Francisco, CA 94132

Shuvo Roy

Department of Bioengineering and
Therapeutic Sciences,
University of California San Francisco,
San Francisco, CA 94143

Manuscript received June 20, 2015; final manuscript received December 22, 2015; published online February 17, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Rosaire Mongrain.

J. Med. Devices 10(1), 011008 (Feb 17, 2016) (7 pages) Paper No: MED-15-1204; doi: 10.1115/1.4032615 History: Received June 20, 2015; Revised December 22, 2015

Magnetic compression based anastomoses use magnetic force to necrose tissue between two magnets to create an anastomosis. Nickel-plated neodymium–iron–boron magnets are used in our study. The compression pressure between the magnets depends on the distance between the magnets, which is determined by the thickness of the compressed tissue and depends on bowel wall thickness and elasticity. It is critical to know the distance between the magnets once the tissue is compressed because the magnets must be within a critical distance of each other in order to create enough compressive force to necrose the tissue. We have developed an inductance sensor to detect the distance (tissue thickness) between the two magnets after the surgeon has deployed them. Inductance sensing is a contact-less sensing method that enables precise short-range detection of conducting surfaces. The inductor coil mounted on one magnet detects the second magnet by measuring the change in inductance due to eddy current induced on the nickel-plated surface of the second magnet. The change in the inductance is proportional to the change in distance between the magnets. The sensor was first calibrated by using polycarbonate sheets to simulate the intestine tissue. We are able to detect up to 6 mm of spacing between the magnets. Pig intestine from Yorkshire pigs was used to characterize the sensor. We are able to distinguish up to five distinct layers of the intestine from the large intestine. This sensing mechanism can indicate the operating surgeon the exact thickness of the tissue compressed between the two magnets. The surgeon can thus be sure of formation of a clean anastomosis and avoid the likelihood of the magnets sliding away or uncoupling.

Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Linn, B. S. , Reisman, T. M. , Yurt, R. W. , and Polk, H. C., Jr. , 1968, “ Intestinal Anastomosis by Invagination: A Historical Review of a ‘New’ Technic With Controlled Study of Its Potential,” Ann. Surg., 167(3), pp. 393–398. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Hyman, N. , Manchester, T. L. , Osler, T. , Burns, B. , and Cataldo, P. A. , 2007, “ Anastomotic Leaks After Intestinal Anastomosis It's Later Than You Think,” Ann. Surg., 245(2), pp. 254–258. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Zaritzky, M. , Ben, R. , and Johnston, K. , 2014, “ Magnetic Gastrointestinal Anastomosis in Pediatric Patients,” J. Pediatr. Surg., 49(7), pp. 1131–1137. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Jamshidi, R. , Stephenson, J. T. , Clay, J. G. , Pichakron, K. O. , and Harrison, M. R. , 2009, “ Magnamosis: Magnetic Compression Anastomosis With Comparison to Suture and Staple Techniques,” J. Pediatr. Surg., 44(1), pp. 222–228. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Pichakron, K. O. , Jelin, E. B. , Hirose, S. , Curran, P. F. , Jamshidi, R. , Stephenson, J. T. , Fechter, R. , Strange, M. , and Harrison, M. R. , 2011, “ Magnamosis II: Magnetic Compression Anastomosis for Minimally Invasive Gastrojejunostomy and Jejunojejunostomy,” Am. Coll. Surg., 212(1), pp. 42–49. [CrossRef]
Gonzales, K. D. , Douglas, G. , Pichakron, K. O. , Kwiat, D. A. , Gallardo, S. G. , Encinas, J. L. , Hirose, S. , and Harrison, M. R. , 2012, “ Magnamosis III: Delivery of a Magnetic Compression Anastomosis Device Using Minimally Invasive Endoscopic Techniques,” J. Pediatr. Surg., 47(6), pp. 1291–1295. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Wall, J. , Diana, M. , Leroy, J. , DeRuijter, V. , Gonzales, K. D. , Lindner, V. , Harrison, M. , and Marescaux, J. , 2013, “ MAGNAMOSIS IV: Magnetic Compression Anastomosis for Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery,” Endoscopy, 45(8), pp. 1–6. [CrossRef]
Diana, M. , Wall, J. , Perretta, S. , Dallemagne, B. , Gonzales, K. D. , Harrison, M. R. , Agnus, V. , Soler, L. , Nicolau, S. , and Marescaux, J. , 2011, “ Totally Endoscopic Magnetic Enteral Bypass by External Guided Rendez-Vous Technique,” Surg. Innovation, 18(4), pp. 317–320. [CrossRef]
Leroy, J. , Perretta, S. , Diana, M. , Wall, J. , Lindner, V. , Harrison, M. , and Marescaux, J. , 2012, “ An Original Endoluminal Magnetic Anastomotic Device Allowing Pure NOTES Transgastric and Transrectal Sigmoidectomy in a Porcine Model: Proof of Concept,” Surg. Innovation, 19(2), pp. 109–116. [CrossRef]
Lovvorn, H. N., III , Baron, C. M. , Danko, M. E. , Novotny, N. M. , Bucher, B. T. , Johnston, K. K. , and Zaritzky, M. F. , 2014, “ Staged Repair of Esophageal Atresia: Pouch Approximation and Catheter-Based Magnetic Anastomosis,” J. Pediatr. Surg. Case Rep., 2(4), pp. 170–175. [CrossRef]
Ho, Y.-H. , and Ashour, M. A. T. , 2010, “ Techniques for Colorectal Anastomosis,” World J. Gastroenterol., 16(13), pp. 1610–1621. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Lambe, T. , Ríordáin, M. G. , Cahill, R. A. , and Cantillon-Murphy, P. , 2014, “ Magnetic Compression in Gastrointestinal and Bilioenteric Anastomosis: How Much Force?” Surg. Innovation, 21(1), pp. 65–73. [CrossRef]
Cummings, B. , 1991, “ Applying Proximity Sensors,” I&Cs-Control Technol. Eng. Eng. Manage., 64(9), pp. 45–47.
Milanovich, F. P. , Hirschfeld, T. B. , Wang, F. T. , Klainer, S. M. , and Walt, D. , 1984, “ Clinical Measurements Using Fiber Optics and Optrodes,” Proc. SPIE, 494, pp. 18–24.
Peterson, J. , and Vurek, G. , 1984, “ Fiber-Optic Sensors for Biomedical Applications,” Science, 224(4645), pp. 123–127. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Roriz, P. , Frazão, O. , Lobo-Ribeiro, A. B. , Santos, J. L. , and Simões, J. A. , 2013, “ Review of Fiber-Optic Pressure Sensors for Biomedical and Biomechanical Applications,” J. Biomed. Opt., 18(5), p. 050903. [CrossRef]
Petersen, K. , 1996, “ Biomedical Applications of MEMS,” International Electron Devices Meeting (IDEM '96), San Francisco, CA, Dec. 8–11, pp. 239–242.
Wahab, Y. , Zayegh, A. , and Begg, R. , 2010, “ Silicon Implementation of Micro Pressure Sensor,” International Conference on Electronic Devices, Systems and Applications (ICEDSA), Kuala Lumpur, Apr. 12–13, pp. 232–235.
Popovic, R. S. , 1989, “ Hall Effect Device,” Sens. Actuators, 17(3), pp. 39–53. [CrossRef]
Wang, Y. , Li, J. , and Viehland, D. , 2014, “ Magnetoelectrics for Magnetic Sensor Applications: Status, Challenges and Perspectives,” Mater. Today, 17(6), pp. 269–275. [CrossRef]
Texas Instruments, “ 5 V, High Resolution, Inductance to Digital Converter for Inductive Sensing Applications,” Texas Instruments Inc., Dallas, TX, http://www.ti.com/product/ldc1000
Zhao, J. , 2010, “ A New Calculation for Designing Multilayer Planar Spiral Inductors,” EDN, July, pp. 37–40.
Glaser, R. , 2013, Biophysics, Springer, New York.
Tanimoto, Y. , Fujiwara, M. , Sueda, M. , Inoue, K. , and Akita, M. , 2005, “ Magnetic Levitation of Plastic Chips: Applications for Magnetic Susceptibility Measurement and Magnetic Separation,” Jpn. J. Appl. Phys., Part 1, 44(9A), pp. 6801–6803. [CrossRef]
Macari, M. , and Balthazar, E. J. , 2001, “ CT of Bowel Wall Thickening: Significance and Pitfalls of Interpretation,” Am. J. Roentgenol., 176(5), pp. 1105–1116. [CrossRef]
Haber, H. P. , Benda, N. , Fitzke, G. , Lang, A. , Langenberg, M. , Riethmueller, J. , and Stern, M. , 1997, “ Colonic Wall Thickness Measured by Ultrasound: Striking Difference in Patients With Cystic Fibrosis Versus Healthy Control,” Gut, 40(3), pp. 406–411. [CrossRef] [PubMed]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Illustration of the Magnamosis procedure: (a) the first magnet is installed at the distal end using laparotomy and (b) the second magnet is installed at the proximal end using an endoscope. In this case, it is in the stomach. (c) The two magnets are bought close to each other. (d) The magnets are self-aligned and are attracted to each other. (e) Once the entire tissue between the two magnets is completely necrosed, it is dislodged and comes out of the rectum.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Orientation of the inductor coil relative to the magnet

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Theoretical estimation of the inductance of a spiral inductor coil as function of number of turns

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

S-parameter measurements of the custom-made inductor coil connected as a tank circuit with capacitor in parallel: (a) modulus and phase of s11 and (b) modulus and phase of s12

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Testing configuration. The inductor coil printed on a printed circuit board is placed on the first magnet. Polycarbonate sheets of thickness 0.6 mm are used to simulate the tissue. (a) The second magnet is not modified and is used as is and placed on the polycarbonate sheets. (b) The aluminum foil is used as the second conducting target. (c) The aluminum foil is used in conjunction with the second magnet. (d) Symmetric configuration. Two coils are mounted on each magnet. The two coils are connected in series.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Experiment setup with pig intestine between the two magnets. The bottom magnet and the inductor coil are kept in a polycarbonate cover to avoid short circuiting of the inductor coil due to contact with the tissue. In a clinical setting, this will be avoided be including the inductor coil within the polycarbonate casing that holds the magnet.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Inductance change between the two magnets as a function of polycarbonate thickness. Nickel-plated magnet refers to the configuration in setup (Fig. 6(a)); aluminum foil below the second magnet refers to the configuration in Fig. 6(c); and aluminum foil only refers to the configuration shown in Fig. 6(b)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Change in inductance for a symmetric setup with two inductor coils in series. One coil is mounted below the magnet, and the second magnet is on top of the magnet. Both the magnets are thus identical and is referred to as symmetric setup/also shown in the same graph the results with single coil to highlight the contrast.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Inductance change for different thicknesses of pig intestine. Experimental setup used to measure the thickness of pig intestine is shown in Fig. 7. The thickness of the tissue ranged from 0.45 mm to 0.75 mm.




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In