0
Technical Brief

Tissue Deformation and Insertion Force of Bee-Stinger Inspired Surgical Needles

[+] Author and Article Information
Mohammad Sahlabadi

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Temple University,
Philadelphia, PA 19122
e-mail: mohammad.sahlabadi@temple.edu

Parsaoran Hutapea

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Temple University,
Philadelphia, PA 19122
e-mail: hutapea@temple.edu

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received January 8, 2018; final manuscript received June 1, 2018; published online July 30, 2018. Editor: William Durfee.

J. Med. Devices 12(3), 034501 (Jul 30, 2018) (4 pages) Paper No: MED-18-1004; doi: 10.1115/1.4040637 History: Received January 08, 2018; Revised June 01, 2018

Surgical needles are commonly used to reach target locations inside of the body for percutaneous procedures. The major issues in needle steering in tissues are the insertion force which causes tissue damage and tissue deformation that causes the needle path deviation (i.e., tip deflection) resulting in the needle missing the intended target. In this study, honeybee-inspired needle prototypes were proposed and studied to decrease the insertion force and to reduce the tissue deformation. Three-dimensional (3D) printing technology was used to manufacture scaled-up needle prototypes. Needle insertion tests on tissue-mimicking polyvinyl chloride (PVC) gel were performed to measure the insertion force and the tip deflection. Digital image correlation (DIC) study was conducted to determine the tissue deformation during the insertion. It was demonstrated that the bioinspired needles can be utilized to decrease the insertion force by 24% and to minimize the tip deflection. It was also observed that the bioinspired needles decrease the tissue deformation by 17%. From this study, it can be concluded that the proposed bee-inspired needle design can be used to develop and manufacture innovative surgical needles for more effective and less invasive percutaneous procedures.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Buzurovic, I. , Misic, V. , and Yu, Y. , 2012, “ Needle Identification in High-Dose-Rate Prostate Brachytherapy Using Ultrasound Imaging Modality,” International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology (EMBC), San Diego, CA, Aug. 28–Sept. 1, pp. 476–479.
Podder, T. K. , Dicker, A. P. , Hutapea, P. , Darvish, K. , and Yu, Y. , 2012, “ A Novel Curvilinear Approach for Prostate Seed Implant,” Med. Phys., 39(4), pp. 1887–1892. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Sahlabadi, M. , Khodaei, S. , and Hutapea, P. , 2017, “ Design and Evaluation of Advanced Smart Needles for Brain Biopsy,” ASME Paper No. SMASIS2017-3838.
Abolhassani, N. , Patel, R. , and Moallem, M. , 2006, “ Control of Soft Tissue Deformation During Robotic Needle Insertion,” Minimally Invasive Ther. Allied Technol., 5(3), pp. 165–176. [CrossRef]
van Gerwen, D. J. , Dankelman, J. , and van den Dobbelsteen, J. J. , 2012, “ Needle-Tissue Interaction Forces—A Survey of Experimental Data,” Med. Eng. Phys., 34(6), pp. 665–680. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Mahvash, M. , and Dupont, P. E. , 2009, “ Fast Needle Insertion to Minimize Tissue Deformation and Damage,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Kobe, Japan, May 12–17, pp. 3097–3102.
Hing, J. T. , Brooks, A. D. , and Desai, J. P. , 2006, “ Reality-Based Needle Insertion Simulation for Haptic Feedback in Prostate Brachytherapy,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Orlando, FL, May 15–19, pp. 619–624.
Urrea, F. A. , Casanova, F. , Orozco, G. A. , and Garcia, J. J. , 2016, “ Evaluation of the Friction Coefficient, the Radial Stress, and the Damage Work During Needle Insertions Into Agarose Gels,” J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater., 56, pp. 98–105. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
DiMaio, S. P. , and Salcudean, S. E. , 2003, “ Needle Insertion Modeling and Simulation,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Autom., 19(5), pp. 864–875. [CrossRef]
Abolhassani, N. , Patel, R. V. , and Ayazi, F. , 2007, “ Minimization of Needle Deflection in Robot‐Assisted Percutaneous Therapy,” Int. J. Med. Rob. Comput. Assisted Surg., 3(2), pp. 140–148. [CrossRef]
Sahlabadi, M. , Gardell, D. , Attia, J. Y. , Khodaei, S. , and Hutapea, P. , 2017, “ Insertion Mechanics of 3D Printed Honeybee-Inspired Surgery Needles for Percutaneous Procedure,” Design of Medical Devices Conference, Minneapolis, MN, Apr. 10–13, Paper No. DMD2017-3457.
Sahlabadi, M. , and Hutapea, P. , 2017, “ Novel Design of Honeybee-Inspired Needles for Percutaneous Procedure,” Bioinspiration Biomimetics, 13(3), p. 036013. [CrossRef]
Sahlabadi, M. , Khodaei, S. , Jezler, K. , and Hutapea, P. , 2017, “ Insertion Mechanics of Bioinspired Needles Into Soft Tissues,” Minimally Invasive Ther. Allied Technol. (epub).
Li, D. R. , Yeh, J. K. , Putra, K. , and Shih, A. , 2017, “ Optical Measurement of Tissue Deformation in Needle Insertion,” Procedia CIRP, 65, pp. 175–179. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

The DIC study of a bioinspired needle θ1 = 170 deg, θ2 = 90 deg, h = 0.5 mm, LB = 40 mm, t = 0.2 mm. In our DIC images 1 pixel (PX) equals to 0.403 mm: (a) map of tissue deformation in honeybee-inspired needle insertion in x-direction (U), (b) map of tissue deformation in conventional needle insertion in x-direction (U), (c) map of tissue deformation in honeybee-inspired needle insertion in y-direction (V), and (d) map of tissue deformation in conventional needle insertion in y-direction (V).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Needle deflection curves versus insertion depth

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Effect of barbs on insertion force for needles with (a) θ1 = 170 deg and θ2 = 90 deg, (b) a conventional needle, and (c) θ1 = 170 deg and θ2 = 170 deg [12,13]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Needle insertion force versus insertion depth

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Needle insertion test setup

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

A captured honeybee stinger compared to the proposed design. Notice that the dashed line indicates the outer diameter of the needle body in the bioinspired needle design. θ1 is front angle and θ2 is back angles, h is the barb height.

Tables

Errata

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