Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
BioMed Research International
Volume 2016, Article ID 9734512, 8 pages
Clinical Study

Treatment of Glioma Using neuroArm Surgical System

Project neuroArm, Department of Clinical Neuroscience and the Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4Z6

Received 24 March 2016; Accepted 28 April 2016

Academic Editor: Alessandro Della Puppa

Copyright © 2016 Yaser Maddahi et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


The use of robotic technology in the surgical treatment of brain tumour promises increased precision and accuracy in the performance of surgery. Robotic manipulators may allow superior access to narrow surgical corridors compared to freehand or conventional neurosurgery. This paper reports values and ranges of tool-tissue interaction forces during the performance of glioma surgery using an MR compatible, image-guided neurosurgical robot called neuroArm. The system, capable of microsurgery and stereotaxy, was used in the surgical resection of glioma in seven cases. neuroArm is equipped with force sensors at the end-effector allowing quantification of tool-tissue interaction forces and transmits force of dissection to the surgeon sited at a remote workstation that includes a haptic interface. Interaction forces between the tool tips and the brain tissue were measured for each procedure, and the peak forces were quantified. Results showed maximum and minimum peak force values of 2.89 N (anaplastic astrocytoma, WHO grade III) and 0.50 N (anaplastic oligodendroglioma, WHO grade III), respectively, with the mean of peak forces varying from case to case, depending on type of the glioma. Mean values of the peak forces varied in range of 1.27 N (anaplastic astrocytoma, WHO grade III) to 1.89 N (glioblastoma with oligodendroglial component, WHO grade IV). In some cases, ANOVA test failed to reject the null hypothesis of equality in means of the peak forces measured. However, we could not find a relationship between forces exerted to the pathological tissue and its size, type, or location.