IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine - June 2017 - 20

Arianna Menciassi and her team at The BioRobotics Institute.

picture after connecting the dots." The
last part of this suggestion is from Steve
Jobs, I think.
Defining the trend of robotics for
surgery, therapy, and diagnosis would
require more than one column. The
field should be
analyzed from
Thanks to
many different
perspectives, in-
these technical
cluding imag-
and scientific
ing solutions,
robotic delivery
challenges, I
of therapy, no-
entered the
vel instrumen-
tation, drug de-
community of
livery methods,
surgical robotics
and autonomous
versus teleop-
by interacting
erated control
with very highly
modalities.
Wi t h m y
qualified scientists.
physics back-
ground, my first
scientific challenge as a first-year Ph.D.
student in 1996 was to develop novel
solutions for micromanipulation of both
artificial and biological parts. The idea
was not just about using microgrippers,
microelectromechanical systems devic-
es, and teleoperated systems with aug-
mented reality, but also about exploring
wireless or no-contact manipulation
20

IEEE ROBOTICS & AUTOMATION MAGAZINE

june 2017

techniques such as optical tweezers,
electrophoresis, and acoustic forces.
Although toward the end of my doctoral
studies I achieved interesting results by
developing sensorized contact-based
microgrippers for tissue palpation in
microsurgery (I obtained the Best
Manipulation Paper Award at ICRA
2001, in Seoul), the fil rouge of wireless
manipulation has characterized my
entire career, and it is something that I
see as one of the major trends today in
surgical robotics.
Starting from the tip (i.e., the micro-
gripper for tissue manipulation), I had
the opportunity later to develop the
remaining part of a novel surgical tool-
the tail. I dedicated about ten years to
developing advanced devices for colo-
noscopy with self-propelling abilities
and different generations of active
endoscopic capsules for gastrointestinal
tract exploration and therapy. Thanks
to these technical and scientific chal-
lenges, I entered the community of sur-
gical robotics by interacting with very
highly qualified scientists. At that time,
I was offered a very comprehensive
book, titled Computer-Integrated Surgery: Technology and Clinical Applications [1]; this book, with its old-style
red canvas cover, still holds a place of
honor in my office today. Reading this

book, I convinced myself that my inter-
action with clinicians and end-users
should be less sporadic. Input from cli-
nicians can enrich young researchers
greatly, not only from an application
viewpoint but also in terms of develop-
ing a humble and collaborative attitude
through accepting their criticisms and
combining the typical technology-driv-
en approach of researchers with the
unmet clinical needs of clinicians.
I would like to mention a couple of
situations in which this sort of input
was fundamental in steering my re-
search. The first instance was when a
medical doctor, collaborating with me
to develop endoscopic capsules for
gastric exploration, provided the solu-
tion for distending the stomach for
longer than 20 min by simply drinking
a physiological solution with a low
degree of absorption. He solved in a
few minutes all our technical problems
surrounding developing protruding
legs and appendices to mechanically
distend the stomach folds-with the
technical challenge to produce several
Newton forces from a 1-cm3 capsule!
The second event was more recent: I
was collaborating with a vascular sur-
geon to develop a wireless magnetic
probe for exploring the vascular tree
by exploiting ultrasound-based navi-
gation solutions. I was presenting the
overall concept and some preliminary
results to this surgeon, and I was real-
ly happy about the solution we devel-
oped for reaching atherosclerotic
plaque in remote regions of the vas-
cular tree. The surgeon followed my
presentation closely, then comment-
ed, "Great job, Arianna. And once
you've reached the area of interest,
what do you plan to do with the
plaque? Otherwise, it makes no sense
reaching the plaque and disturbing
it!" My colleagues and I had been so
focused on the capabilities of the
magnetic probe that we forgot to
devise a feasible solution for treating
the plaque! After that discussion, I
remember I changed my typical pre-
sentation opening. Previously, the
title was "How to Reach the Target." I
changed it to "Upon Reaching the
Target, How Can It Be Treated?"

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine - June 2017