An anthropomorphic sonography phantom for the evaluation of mechatronic devices for heart surgery

References

[1] Arnez ZM, Valdatta L, Tyler MP, Planinsek F. Anatomy of the internal mammary veins and their use in free TRAM flap breast reconstruction. Br J Plast Surg 1995; 48: 540–545.10.1016/0007-1226(95)90041-1Search in Google Scholar

[2] Arruda AM, Dearani, JA, Click, RL, Ishikura F, Seward JB. Intraoperative application of power Doppler imaging: visualization of myocardial perfusion after anastomosis of left internal thoracic artery to left anterior descending coronary artery. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 1999; 12: 650–654.10.1053/je.1999.v12.a99349Search in Google Scholar

[3] Cartier R, Dias OS, Pellerin M, Hébert Y, Leclerc Y. Changing flow pattern of the internal thoracic artery undergoing coronary bypass grafting: continuous-wave Doppler assessment. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1996; 112: 52–58.10.1016/S0022-5223(96)70177-0Search in Google Scholar

[4] Culjat MO, Goldenberg D, Tewari P, Singh RS. A review of tissue substitutes for ultrasound imaging. Ultrasound Med Biol 2010; 36: 861–873.10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2010.02.012Search in Google Scholar

[5] Deng Y, Byth K, Paterson HS. Phrenic nerve injury associated with high free right internal mammary artery harvesting. Ann Thorac Surg 2003; 76: 459–463.10.1016/S0003-4975(03)00511-3Search in Google Scholar

[6] Falk V, Fann JI, Grünenfelder J, Burdon TA. Endoscopic Doppler for detecting vessels in closed chest bypass grafting. Heart Surg Forum 2000; 3: 331–333.Search in Google Scholar

[7] Falk V, Jacobs S, Gummert J, Walther T. Robotic coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) – the Leipzig experience. Surg Clin North Am 2003; 83: 1381–1386, ix.10.1016/S0039-6109(03)00165-8Search in Google Scholar

[8] Fröhlich FA, Passig G, Vazquez A, Hirzinger G. Robot assisted internal mammary artery detection for coronary revascularisation surgery. IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems 2010 (IROS 2010): 1849–1855.10.1109/IROS.2010.5653269Search in Google Scholar

[9] Hartman JM, Kelder JC, Ackerstaff RG, Bal ET, Vermeulen FE, Bogers AJ. Different behavior of sequential versus single left internal mammary artery to left anterior descending area grafts(1). Cardiovasc Surg 2001; 9: 586–594.10.1016/S0967-2109(01)00018-7Search in Google Scholar

[10] Kharine A, Manohar S, Seeton R, et al. Poly(vinyl alcohol) gels for use as tissue phantoms in photoacoustic mammography. Phys Med Biol 2003; 48: 357–370.10.1088/0031-9155/48/3/306Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[11] Koch AD, Buzink SN, Heemskerk J, et al. Expert and construct validity of the Simbionix GI Mentor II endoscopy simulator for colonoscopy. Surg Endosc 2008; 22: 158–162.10.1007/s00464-007-9394-6Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[12] Maithel S, Sierra R, Korndorffer J, et al. Construct and face validity of MIST-VR, Endotower, and CELTS: are we ready for skills assessment using simulators? Surg Endosc 2006; 20: 104–112.10.1007/s00464-005-0054-4Search in Google Scholar

[13] Mohr FW, Falk V, Diegeler A, Autschback R. Computer-enhanced coronary artery bypass surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999; 117: 1212–1214.10.1016/S0022-5223(99)70261-8Search in Google Scholar

[14] Oda K, Hirose K, Nishimori H, Sato K, Yamashiro T, Ogoshi S. Assessment of internal thoracic artery graft with intraoperative color Doppler ultrasonography. Ann Thorac Surg 1998; 66: 79–81.10.1016/S0003-4975(98)00317-8Search in Google Scholar

[15] Ortmaier T, Vitrani M, Morel G, Pinault S. Robust real-time instrument tracking in ultrasound images for visual servoing. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation 2005: 2167–2172.10.1117/12.594109Search in Google Scholar

[16] Peters TM, Cleary KR. Image-guided interventions: technology and applications. New York: Springer 2008.10.1007/978-0-387-73858-1Search in Google Scholar

[17] Ramnarine KV, Anderson T, Hoskins PR. Construction and geometric stability of physiological flow rate wall-less stenosis phantoms. Ultrasound Med Biol 2001; 27: 245–250.10.1016/S0301-5629(00)00304-5Search in Google Scholar

[18] Ramnarine KV, Nassiri DK, Hoskins PR, Lubbers J. Validation of a new blood-mimicking fluid for use in Doppler flow test objects. Ultrasound Med Biol 1998; 24: 451–459.10.1016/S0301-5629(97)00277-9Search in Google Scholar

[19] Reinertsen I, Collins DL. A realistic phantom for brain-shift simulations. Med Phys 2006; 33: 3234–3240.10.1118/1.2219091Search in Google Scholar

[20] Rickey DW, Picot PA, Christopher DA, Fenster A. A wall-less vessel phantom for Doppler ultrasound studies. Ultrasound Med Biol 1995; 21: 1163–1176.10.1016/0301-5629(95)00044-5Search in Google Scholar

[21] Samani A, Bishop J, Luginbuhl C, Plewes DB. Measuring the elastic modulus of ex vivo small tissue samples. Phys Med Biol 2003; 48: 2183–2198.10.1088/0031-9155/48/14/310Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[22] Surry KJ, Austin HJ, Fenster A, Peters TM. Poly(vinyl alcohol) cryogel phantoms for use in ultrasound and MR imaging. Phys Med Biol 2004; 49: 5529–5546.10.1088/0031-9155/49/24/009Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[23] Thorne ML, Poepping TL, Rankin RN, Steinman DA, Holdsworth DW. Use of an ultrasound blood-mimicking fluid for Doppler investigations of turbulence in vitro. Ultrasound Med Biol 2008; 34: 1163–1173.10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2007.12.014Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[24] Van Nortwick SS, Lendvay TS, Jensen AR, Wright AS, Horvath KD, Kim S. Methodologies for establishing validity in surgical simulation studies. Surgery 2010; 147: 622–630.10.1016/j.surg.2009.10.068Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[25] Zell K, Sperl JI, Vogel MW, Niessner R, Haisch C. Acoustical properties of selected tissue phantom materials for ultrasound imaging. Phys Med Biol 2007; 52: N475–N484.10.1088/0031-9155/52/20/N02Search in Google Scholar PubMed