{"ID":6138199,"CreatedAt":"2026-07-09T01:07:32.349475501Z","UpdatedAt":"2026-07-11T10:22:07.798851522Z","DeletedAt":null,"paper_url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.07253","arxiv_id":"2607.07253","title":"Manual, Joystick, or Haptic Control? An In Vitro Comparison of Navigation Strategies for Robotic Interventional Neuroradiology Procedures","abstract":"Objective: To evaluate robotic controller interfaces for interventional neuroradiology procedures in-vitro incorporating a force-sensing platform to assess safety. Methods: A custom endovascular robot, device-mimicking controller, and sensorized neurovascular phantom were developed. Ten interventional neuroradiologists (4 novices, 6 experts) performed simulated navigations using four control modalities: device-mimicking controllers with and without haptic feedback, joystick-based input, and manual navigation. Navigation time, peak vessel-wall forces, incorrect catheterisations, and prolapse events were assessed, alongside user analyses. Results: Manual navigation was fastest (mean 47.7 s) compared to haptic-on (248.7 s), haptic-off (314.7 s), and joystick (392.6 s) modalities (p\u003c0.001). Regardless of controller type, vessel-wall forces were below the 0.70 N puncture threshold; therefore all modalities were considered safe. Joystick produced significantly more prolapse events than manual control (1.56 vs 0.13; p=0.018). Operator experience was relevant to performance: experts made fewer incorrect catheterisations than novices (0.25 vs 0.62; p=0.035) and applied less vessel-wall force (p\u003c0.0005); these effects were sustained across controllers but accentuated when haptics were on. Users perceived haptic on and haptic off as similarly intuitive, and more intuitive than joystick (p=0.033). Conclusion: Device-mimicking robotic controllers outperform joystick interfaces on most metrics; haptic feedback shows promising but non-significant performance benefits.","short_abstract":"Objective: To evaluate robotic controller interfaces for interventional neuroradiology procedures in-vitro incorporating a force-sensing platform to assess safety. Methods: A custom endovascular robot, device-mimicking controller, and sensorized neurovascular phantom were developed. Ten interventional neuroradiologists...","url_abs":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.07253","url_pdf":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/2607.07253v1","authors":"[\"Benjamin Jackson\",\"Nikola Fischer\",\"Harry Robershaw\",\"Xingyu Chen\",\"S. H. Hadi Sadati\",\"Yang Li\",\"Jeremy Lynch\",\"Nasr Abdelsalam\",\"Jonathon Buwanabala\",\"Matthew Benger\",\"Sara Sciacca\",\"Naga Kandasamy\",\"Marco Mancuso-Marcello\",\"Parthiban Balasundaram\",\"Sahan Guruge\",\"Neelan Das\",\"Alejandro Granados\",\"Kawal Rhode\",\"Thomas C Booth\"]","published":"2026-07-08T10:35:22Z","proceeding":"cs.RO","tasks":"[\"cs.RO\"]","methods":"[]","has_code":false}