Mechanical manipulator for intuitive control of endoscopic instruments with seven degrees of freedom

References

• Shennib H, Mack MJ, Lee AGC. A survey on minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting. Ann Thorc Surg 1997;64:110–5.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Buffolo E, Silva de Andrade JC, Rodrigues Branco JN, Teles CA et al. Coronary artery bypass grafting without cardiopulmonary bypass. Ann Thorc Surg 1996; 61: 63–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Califore AM, Di Giammarco G, Teodori G et al. Left anterior descending coronary artery grafting via left anterior small thoracotomy without cardiopulmonary bypass. Ann Thorc Surg 1996;61:1658–65.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schwartz DS, Ribakove GH, Grossi EA et al. Single and multivessel Port-access coronary artery bypass graft- ing with cardioplegic arrest: technique and reproduc- ibility. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1997;114:46–52.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Borst C, Gru” ndeman PF. Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting: An experimental perspective. Circulation 1999;99:1400–3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mack MJ, Acuff TE, Casimir-Ahn H, Lonn UJ et al. Video-assisted coronary bypass grafting on beating heart. Ann Thorac Surg 1997;63:S100–3.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Loulmet D, Carpentier A, d’Attellis N, Berrebi A et al. Endoscopic coronary artery bypass grafting with the aid of roboticassisted instruments. J Thorac Cardio- vasc Surg 1999;118:4–10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falk V, Diegeler A, Walther T et al. Total endoscopic coronary artery bypass grafting. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2000;17:38–45.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohr FW, Falk V et al. Computer enhanced coronary artery bypass surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999;117:1212–3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grimbergen CA, Jaspers JEN, Herder JL, Stassen HG. Development of laparoscopic instruments. Min lnvas Ther & Allied Technologies 2001;10:145–54.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tendick F, Jennings RW, Tharp G, Stark L. Sensing and manipulation problems in endoscopic surgery: Experiment, analysis and observation. Presence 1993; 2:66–81.
   Google Scholar
• Breedveld P, Stassen HG, Meijer DW, Jakimowicz JJ. Manipulation in Laparoscopic Surgery: Overview of Impeding Effects and Supporting Aids. J Laparo- endosc Surg 1999;9:469–80.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson R, Romfh R. Technique in the use of surgical tools, New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. 1980.
   Google Scholar
• Breedveld P, Wentink M. Eye-hand coordination in laparoscopy—Overview of experiments and support- ing aids. Min lnvas Ther and Allied Technol 2000;10:155–62.
   Google Scholar
• Crothers IR, Gallagher AG, McClure N et al. Experi- enced laparoscopic surgeons are automated to the “fulcrum effect”: An ergonomic demonstration. Endo- scopy 1999;31:365–9.
   Google Scholar
• Van Veelen MA, Meijer DW. Ergonomics and design of laparoscopic instruments: Results of a survey among laparoscopic surgeons. J Laparoendosc Surg A 1999; 9:481–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berguer R, Gerber S, Kilpatrick G et al. A comparison of forearm and thumb muscle electromyographic responses to the use of laparoscopic instruments with either a fnger grasp or a palm grasp. Ergonomics 1999;42:1634–45.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Veelen MA. New ergonomicguidelines for laparo- scopic instruments. Min lnvas Ther and Allied Technol 2001;10:163–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berguer R, Forkey DL, Smith WD. Ergonomicproblems associated with laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc Ultras 1999;13:466–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matern U, Waller P, Ru” ckauer KD, Farthmann EH. Innovative handles for use in minimally invasive surgery. Min lnvas Ther and Allied Technol 1999; 8: 127–31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grimbergen CA. Minimal Invasive Surgery: Human- Machine Aspects and Engineering Approaches. In: Sheridan TB, van Lunteren T, eds. Perspectives on the human controller, Boston: Lawrence Erlbaum Associ- ates Publishers, 1997:223–31.
   Google Scholar
• Simpson DC. The choice of control system for the multimovement prosthesis: extended physiological proprioception (e.p.p.). In: Herberts P, Kadefors R, Magnusson R, Peterson I, eds. The control of upper- extremity prostheses and orthoses. Springfeld, Illinois, 1974:146–50.
   Google Scholar
• Hogan N. Impedance control: an approach to manipu- lation. J Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control 1985;107:1–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheridan TB. Human Factors in Telesurgery. In: Taylor RH, Lavalle’ e S, Burdea GC, Mo” sges R, eds. Computer lntegrated Surgery, Technology and Clinical Appli- cations, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1996:223–9.
   Google Scholar
• Cool JC. Design of anthropomorphicappliances. In: Sheridan TB, Lunteren T van, eds. Perspectives on the human controller: assays in honor of Henk G. Stassen, 1997:110–19.
   Google Scholar
• Herder JL. Force directed design of laparoscopic forceps, Proceedings ASME DECT 25th Biennial Mechanisms Conference, Sept 13–16, Atlanta, Geogia, paper number DECT98/MECH-5978.
   Google Scholar
• Schurr MO, Buess G, Schwarz K. Robotics in endo- scopic surgery: can mechanical manipulators provide a more simple solution for the problem of limited degrees of freedom? Min lnvas Ther & Allied Technol- ogies 2001;10(6):289–93.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gossot D, Lange G. Defectable and rotatable endo- scopic instrument with intuitive control. Min lnvas Ther & Allied Technologies 2001;10(6):295–303.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jaspers JEN, Den Boer KT, Sjoerdsma W et al. Design and feasibility of PASSIST, a passive instrument posi- tioner. J Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Tech- niques 2000;10:331–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boer KT den, Bruijn M, Jaspers JE et al. Task analyses of Instrument Positioners in laparoscopic Cholecystectomy. Surgical Endoscopy 2002;16:142–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar