At present, the incidence of prostate cancer (PCa) in men is increasing year by year. So, the early diagnosis of PCa is of great significance. Transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-guided biopsy is a common method for diagnosing PCa. The biopsy process is performed manually by urologists but the diagnostic rate is only 20%–30% and its reliability and accuracy can no longer meet clinical needs. The image-guided prostate biopsy robot has the advantages of a high degree of automation, does not rely on the skills and experience of operators, reduces the work intensity and operation time of urologists and so on. Capable of delivering biopsy needles to pre-defined biopsy locations with minimal needle placement errors, it makes up for the shortcomings of traditional free-hand biopsy and improves the reliability and accuracy of biopsy. The integration of medical imaging technology and the robotic system is an important means for accurate tumor location, biopsy puncture path planning and visualization. This paper mainly reviews image-guided prostate biopsy robots. According to the existing literature, guidance modalities are divided into magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), ultrasound (US) and fusion image. First, the robot structure research by different guided methods is the main line and the actuators and material research of these guided modalities is the auxiliary line to introduce and compare. Second, the robot image-guided localization technology is discussed. Finally, the image-guided prostate biopsy robot is summarized and suggestions for future development are provided.
Citation: Yongde Zhang, Qihang Yuan, Hafiz Muhammad Muzzammil, Guoqiang Gao, Yong Xu. Image-guided prostate biopsy robots: A review[J]. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(8): 15135-15166. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023678
[1] | Sekhar Chandra Ray . Possible magnetic performances of graphene-oxide and it's composites: A brief review. AIMS Materials Science, 2023, 10(5): 767-818. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2023043 |
[2] | Yana Fajar Prakasa, Sumari Sumari, Aman Santoso, Muhammad Roy Asrori, Ririn Cahyanti . The performance of radar absorption of MnxFe3–xO4/rGO nanocomposites prepared from iron sand beach and coconut shell waste. AIMS Materials Science, 2023, 10(2): 227-248. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2023013 |
[3] | P. Di Pietro, G. Forte, L. D’Urso, C. Satriano . The hybrid nanobiointerface between nitrogen-doped graphene oxide and lipid membranes: a theoretical and experimental study. AIMS Materials Science, 2017, 4(1): 43-60. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2017.1.43 |
[4] | Elena Kossovich . Theoretical study of chitosan-graphene and other chitosan-based nanocomposites stability. AIMS Materials Science, 2017, 4(2): 317-327. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2017.2.317 |
[5] | Mohamed Jaffer Sadiq Mohamed, Denthaje Krishna Bhat . Novel ZnWO4/RGO nanocomposite as high performance photocatalyst. AIMS Materials Science, 2017, 4(1): 158-171. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2017.1.158 |
[6] | R.A. Silva, C.O. Soares, R. Afonso, M.D. Carvalho, A.C. Tavares, M.E. Melo Jorge, A. Gomes, M.I. da Silva Pereira, C.M. Rangel . Synthesis and electrocatalytic properties of La0.8Sr0.2FeO3−δ perovskite oxide for oxygen reactions. AIMS Materials Science, 2017, 4(4): 991-1009. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2017.4.991 |
[7] | Khang Duy Vu Nguyen, Khoa Dang Nguyen Vo . Magnetite nanoparticles-TiO2 nanoparticles-graphene oxide nanocomposite: Synthesis, characterization and photocatalytic degradation for Rhodamine-B dye. AIMS Materials Science, 2020, 7(3): 288-301. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2020.3.288 |
[8] | Subhajit Das, Sandip Bhattacharya, Debaprasad Das, Hafizur Rahaman . A survey on pristine and intercalation doped graphene nanoribbon interconnect for future VLSI circuits. AIMS Materials Science, 2021, 8(2): 247-260. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2021016 |
[9] | Chaitra Srikanth, Gattumane Motappa Madhu, Hemanth Bhamidipati, Siddarth Srinivas . The effect of CdO–ZnO nanoparticles addition on structural, electrical and mechanical properties of PVA films. AIMS Materials Science, 2019, 6(6): 1107-1123. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2019.6.1107 |
[10] | Rusul A. Ghazi, Khalidah H. Al-Mayalee, Ehssan Al-Bermany, Fouad Sh. Hashim, Abdul Kareem J. Albermany . Impact of polymer molecular weights and graphene nanosheets on fabricated PVA-PEG/GO nanocomposites: Morphology, sorption behavior and shielding application. AIMS Materials Science, 2022, 9(4): 584-603. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2022035 |
At present, the incidence of prostate cancer (PCa) in men is increasing year by year. So, the early diagnosis of PCa is of great significance. Transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-guided biopsy is a common method for diagnosing PCa. The biopsy process is performed manually by urologists but the diagnostic rate is only 20%–30% and its reliability and accuracy can no longer meet clinical needs. The image-guided prostate biopsy robot has the advantages of a high degree of automation, does not rely on the skills and experience of operators, reduces the work intensity and operation time of urologists and so on. Capable of delivering biopsy needles to pre-defined biopsy locations with minimal needle placement errors, it makes up for the shortcomings of traditional free-hand biopsy and improves the reliability and accuracy of biopsy. The integration of medical imaging technology and the robotic system is an important means for accurate tumor location, biopsy puncture path planning and visualization. This paper mainly reviews image-guided prostate biopsy robots. According to the existing literature, guidance modalities are divided into magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), ultrasound (US) and fusion image. First, the robot structure research by different guided methods is the main line and the actuators and material research of these guided modalities is the auxiliary line to introduce and compare. Second, the robot image-guided localization technology is discussed. Finally, the image-guided prostate biopsy robot is summarized and suggestions for future development are provided.
Pt and Pt-based alloys/composites supported on carbon black have long been known as the best catalysts for the oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) in fuel cells [1]. However, their high cost and limited availability hamper the commercial application of fuel cells [2,3]. Also, Pt cathode undergoes deactivation during discharge of direct alcohol fuel cells (DAFCs) due to the crossover of alcohol molecule from the anode to the cathode compartment through the polymer membrane [1]. To overcome these difficulties, tremendous interests have been shown during recent years toward development of low cost, efficient and stable non-precious metals and oxides [2,4,5,6,7,8,9] and metal-free electro catalysts [10,11] and are comprehensively reviewed in [12]. Recently, several heteroatom (N, B, S, P, Fe or Co)-doped carbon materials, such as carbon nanotubes (CNTs) [5,11,12,13,14,15], graphene [16,17], graphitic arrays [11,18] and amorphous carbon [19,20] have been found to exhibit excellent electrocatalytic performance for ORR. However, only a few novel catalysts exhibited ORR activities on a competitive level with Pt [4,11,19,21].
Graphene, a fundamental building block of the carbon based material, has been considered as the ideal low cost electrode material with large surface area (2630 m2·g−1), excellent electrical conductivity, high thermal and chemical stability [22]. Recently, N-doped graphene electrode materials have demonstrated excellent performances and great potentials in the field of sensor [23], Li-ion batteries [24,25], metal-air batteries [26], super capacitors [27,28], fuel cells [29,30] and so on. It is believed that graphene with suitable level of N-doping and further modifications could be promising electrode materials for varied applications.
In order to improve the ORR activity of N-doped GNS further, we have synthesized binary composites of N-doped GNS and cobalt tungsten oxide containing 5, 10, 20, 40 and 50% of the oxide by weight. Preliminary investigations have shown that the composite with 40% CoWO4 is the greatest ORR active in 1 M KOH. Also, its capacitance seems to be superior to N-GNS or CoWO4 alone. These results inspired us to carry out detailed investigations on the 40% CoWO4/N-GNS composite material with regard to its application as ORR catalyst and also, to explore its suitability for other electrochemical applications, such as supercapacitor and oxygen evolution (EO) catalyst. Detailed results of the investigation are described in the paper.
Graphite oxide (GO) was used as the precursor in synthesis of both the graphene nano-sheets (GNS) and nitrogen doped-GNS (N-GNS). GO was prepared from graphite by the modified Hummers and Offenmans method [31]. GNS were obtained from GO as previously described [31,32]. For the preparation of N-GNS, 50 mg of GO was dispersed in 5 ml distilled water, sonicated the suspension about 1 h and to this added 30 ml ammonia (30%) and sonicated the resulting mixture, again, for 30 min. The whole content was transferred into a Teflon autoclave and heated at 220 °C for 12 h in an electric furnace. Mixture was then centrifuged and residue, so obtained, was repeatedly washed with distilled water until pH of the filtrate (i.e. washings) became neutral. It was then dried and left overnight at 100 °C [33].
As per stoichiometry of constituent metals in the oxide, 81.1919 mg of cobalt acetate (Co(CH3COO)2·4H2O) was dissolved in 50 ml double distilled water and kept it at 70 °C. When the solution attained the temperature, added slowly 50 ml sodium tungstate (Na2WO4·2H2O, 2.1505 mg·ml−1) solution under continuous stirring condition. Left the solution for 2 h under the same condition and then centrifuged, washed the precipitate thoroughly with distilled water, dried at 100 °C for overnight and finally sintered it at 500 °C for 3h.
N-GNS was prepared by hydrothermal autoclave method [33] and CoWO4 was prepared by co-precipitation method [34]. Composites of N-GNS and CoWO4 containing 10, 20, 40 and 50% by weight were prepared by dispersing the required quantities of N-GNS and oxide in 10 ml of double distilled water and sonicating the dispersion for 1.5 h. Subsequently, the mixture was centrifuged, washed and then dried in an oven at 100 °C for overnight.
The catalyst ink was prepared, as earlier [21], by dispersing 3 mg of the catalyst powders in 600 µL of ethanol-Nafion (2:1) mixture through ultrasonication for 1 h. After that 8.4 µL of the suspension was placed over the GC disk electrode surface (0.07 cm2), dried in air and then used for electrochemical investigations. The catalyst loading on GC was 0.6 mg·cm−2.
X-ray diffraction (XRD) powder patterns of the catalysts were recorded on an X-ray diffractometer (Thermo Electron) using CuKa as the radiation source (l= 1.541841Å). Morphology of the catalytic films has been studied by transmission electron microscopy (TEM: TECNAI G2 FEI). The oxidation states of metals present in the surface layer of hybrid materials were analyzed using an AMICUS-X-ray photoelectron spectrometer. All binding energy (B.E.) values were charge corrected to the C 1s signal (284.6 eV). The peak deconvolution and fittings were performed by using the XPS PEAK Version 4.1 software.
Electrochemical studies, namely, cyclic (CV) and linear sweep voltammetries (LSV) and choronoamperometry (CA) have been carried out in a three-electrode single-compartment Pyrex glass cell using a potentiostat/galvanostat Model 273A (PARC, USA) [21]. A pure circular Pt-foil (geometrical area ≈ 8 cm2) and SCE were used as counter and reference electrodes, respectively. The rotating disk electrode (RDE) was used as the working electrode. The disk was of GC possessing 0.07 cm2 of surface area. The SCE electrode (Ecalibrated = 0.242 V vs. SHE) was calibrated as earlier [2,21] with respect to a reversible hydrogen electrode (RHE). The potentials mentioned in the text are given against RHE (E = −0.828 V vs. SHE) electrode only.
CV of each electrocatalyst has been carried out at a scan rate of 50 mV·s−1 between 0.07 and 1.17 V vs. RHE in 1 M KOH at 25 °C. Before recording the voltammogram, each electrode was cycled for five runs at the potential scan rate of 50 mV·s−1 in 1 M KOH. CV experiments have been performed in Ar-deoxygenated and O2-saturated 1 M KOH solutions.
LSV experiments were performed to investigate the ORR activities of hybrid electrocatalysts in O2-saturated 1 M KOH at 25 °C. The potential range and scan rate employed were 0.07-1.17 V vs. RHE and 5 mV·s−1, respectively. To obtain O2-saturated and deoxygenated solutions, pure O2 and Ar gas were bubbled for 45 and 30 min, respectively. A flow of O2 was maintained over the electrolyte during the ORR study to ensure its continued O2 saturation.
To determine capacitance, cyclic voltammograms of the composite and N-GNS were recorded at varying scan rates (10-400 mV·s−1) in the potential region from 0.926 to 1.42 V vs. RHE in 1 M KOH. The long term cyclic performances of electrodes were also examined. For the purpose, the voltammogram was recorded between 0.926 V and 1.42 V vs. RHE at the scan rate of 200 mV·s−1 for 1000 cycles.
The oxygen evolution (OER) study has been performed by recording the LSV and Tafel curves. The potential range and scan rate employed in LSV and Tafel experiments were 1.514-1.726 V vs. RHE & 5 mV·s−1 and 1.615-1.820 V vs. RHE & 1 mV·s−1, respectively.
XRD powder patterns of GO, GNS, N-doped GNS and 40% CoWO4/N-GNS recorded between 2θ = 20° and 2θ = 80°, are shown in Figure 1. In Figure 1, the diffraction peak (002) observed at 2θ = 13.24° (d = 6.67 Å) is characteristic of GO [31,35,36] and the diffraction peak (100) at 2θ = 42.54° (d = 2.1 Å) corresponds to the hexagonal structure of carbon [31].
The observation of Figure 1 further shows that after chemical reduction of GO with NaBH4, the typical diffraction peak (002) of GO shifts towards a higher angle, 2θ = 23.06° (d =3.85 Å). The displaced peak (002) looks to be broader indicating the formation of graphene nano-sheets (GNS). The XRD powder pattern of 40% CoWO4/N-GNS exhibited several diffraction peaks. Among them, the prominent ones are at 2θ = 24.72° (d = 3.59 Å), 30.69° (d = 2.91 Å), 36.26° (d = 2.47 Å), 41.32° (d = 2.18 Å), and 65.03° (d = 1.432 Å). These data closely match with data reported in JCPDS file 15-0867 for pure monoclinic phase of CoWO4 with space group “P2/a (13)”. The crystallite size of CoWO4 deposited on N-GNS was 12.7 nm, which were estimated using Scherer formulae and the most intense diffraction peak.
The Raman spectra of all the four samples, graphite oxide (GO), graphene (GNS), nitrogen-doped graphene (N-GNS) and 40% CoWO4/N-GNS, shown in Figure 2, exhibit characteristics D, G and 2D bands respectively at ~1350, ~1570 and 2650 cm−1 [31,35,36].
The observation of Figure 2 shows that when GO is reduced with NaBH4, a small shift in the G band takes place toward slightly lower wave number (≈7 cm−1), which demonstrates that GNS is produced [39]. Further, estimates of the ID (intensity of the D band)/IG (intensity of the G band) ratio were found to be the highest in GNS (1.14) and the lowest in GO (1.01), value being 1.07 in N-doped GNS. The higher ID/IG value of GNS compared to that of GO can be attributed to the increased disorder and defects in GNS. Similarly, the level of disorder and defects also get improved when N-GNS is obtained from GO through the hydrothermal treatment with concentrated NH3. An additional peak observed in the composite CoWO4/N-GNS at 880 cm−1 is the characteristic peak of CoWO4 [40]. The broad and less intense 2D band, shown in Figure 2, is, in fact, the second order of the D band and is characteristic of GNS. This higher order peak is used to determine the number of layers of graphene inthe sample using the relationship [38,41].
The full width at half maximum (FWHM) of 2D = −45(1/N) + 88 [cm−1] | (1) |
The above equation yields N (no. of layers) ≈ 2 which shows that the graphene contains approximately two layers. Thus, the study shows that the graphene sample used in the present study consists of 2 layers.
TEM images of N-GNS and 40% CoWO4/N-GNS shown in Figure 3a-e indicate that the CoWO4 nanoparticles (NPs) deposited on the N-GNS surface are nearly spherical with the average particles size of 14.3 nm, which is, in fact, close to the crystalline size of the oxide (12.7 nm), obtained from the XRD study. Further, the oxide NPs seem to present on the graphene surface in form of clusters (Figure 3c-e). Furthermore, the selected area electron diffraction (SAED) of the sample shown in Figure 3f reveals that the NPs are well crystallized.
XPS spectra of N-doped graphene and 40% CoWO4/N-GNS were recorded and core level N 1s, W 4f and Co 2p spectra are shown in Figure 4. In the N-GNS sample, only C, O, and N were detected with the content of 80%, 11.19%, and 7.98%, respectively. Deconvolution of N 1s spectrum of the sample, N-GNS (Figure 4a), yields three characteristic peaks respectively for pyridinic-N (B.E. = 398.3 eV), pyrrolic-N (B.E. = 399.6 eV) and graphitic-N (B.E. = 401.1 eV) [42]. Similar peaks were also observed for the XPS of the composite, however, they are slightly displaced toward the higher energy (Figure 4b). Thus, results confirm the successfully chemical doping of nitrogen into the graphene structure. Estimates of distribution of N 1s into the observed three nitrogen functional groups in samples of N-GNS and composite are listed in Table 1. XPS spectra of Co 2p recorded from samples, pure CoWO4 and 40% CoWO4/N-GNS shown in Figure 4c look to be similar. Each spectrum exhibits four peaks: two strong (B.E.s = 780.3-781.0 & 796.6-797.4 eV) and two shake-up satellite (B.E.s = 786.4-787.4 & 802.9-804.0 eV) peaks, indicating presence of Co in the Co2+ oxidation state in the compound [21,34,43]. All the four peaks of Co 2p spectrum get shifted toward the higher B.E. by 0.7-1.1 eV in the case of the composite material. Similarly, the 4f7/2 (B.E. =34.7 eV) and 4f5/2 (B.E. = 36.8 eV) photo peaks of core level W 4f spectrum from pure CoWO4 sample are observed to shift toward the higher binding energy by approximately 1 eV (Figure 4d) when the same sample is present in the composite material. Thus, results show a strong interaction between N-GNS and CoWO4 in the composite resulting in increase of pyridinic-N and graphitic-N and decrease of pyrrolic-N contents in the composite. Further, the XPS of W 4f of the samples, CoWO4 and 40% CoWO4/N-GNS shown in (Figure 4d) demonstrates that W is in oxidation state +6 [34,43].
Samples | Pyridinic-N (at%)a | Pyrrolic- N (at%)a | Quaternary N (at%)a |
N-GNS | 28.9 (B.E. = 398.3 eV) | 53.7 (B.E. = 399.6 eV) | 17.3 (B.E. = 401.1 eV) |
40% CoWO4/NGNS | 35.6 (B.E. = 398.5 eV) | 43.0 (B.E. = 399.9 eV) | 21.0 (B.E. = 401.1 eV) |
aat% atomic percentage calculated from XPS result |
CVs of CoWO4, N-GNS and 40% CoWO4/N-GNSrecorded at 50 mV·s−1, in Ar and of the composite in O2-saturated 1 M KOH are reproduced in Figure 5a. From observation of Figure 5a it appears that the composite material has significantly higher capacitance than those of its constituent components (CoWO4 & N-GNS). It also seems to be active for ORR as is quite evident from (Figure 5b). For clarity, the ORR region of the cathodic cycle, as encircled in Figure 5b, have been expanded and are displayed in inset. To examine the possibility of this material to be use as capacitor as well as catalyst for ORR, investigations have been carried out and results, so obtained, are separately described.
LSVs for N-GNS, CoWO4, x% CoWO4/(100−x)% N-GNS have been recorded at the constant electrode rotation of 1600 rpm in O2-saturated 1 M KOH using the rotating disk electrode technique (RDE) and are reproduced in (Figure 6). The scan rate and the potential region employed in the study were 5 mV·s−1 and 0.07-1.17 V vs. RHE. The catalyst loading on GC disk electrode was kept 0.6 mg·cm−2 in the ORR study. This is, in fact, the optimized loading for obtaining reproducible LSV curves.
Figure 6 shows that the ORR activity of CoWO4 is significantly low compared to that of N-GNS. But, the ORR activities of nanocomposites of N-GNS with 20, 40 and 50% CoWO4 are found to be superior to N-GNS. The onset potential for ORR has also been observed to shift toward noble side in the case of the composite electrodes. Among the CoWO4/N-GNS composite electrodes investigated in the present study, the ORR activity with the composite containing 40% CoWO4 is the greatest. The 10% CoWO4/N-GNS electrode has more or less similar ORR activity as found with N-GNS. It was further noted that the onset (OP = 0.97 V vs. RHE) and half-wave (HWP = 0.81 V vs. RHE) potentials of our active composite electrode, CoWO4/N-GNS, are very close to the commercial Pt/C catalyst (20wt% on Vulcan) (OP = 0.92 and HWP = 0.81 V vs. RHE), however, these values are higher than those recently reported for ORR on N-doped MWCNT/ MnCo2O4 (OP = 0.86 and HWP = 0.75 V vs. RHE) [44].
To evaluate the electrode kinetic parameters for ORR on N-GNS and 40% CoWO4/N-GNS in O2-saturated 1 M KOH, the LSV curves have been recorded at 5 mV·s−1 in the potential region, 0.07-1.17 V vs. RHE and at varying rotations as shown in Figure 7a-b.
Features of LSV curves shown in Figure 7 seem to be almost similar. Each curve has three distinct regions: the activation/kinetic controlled, the mixed kinetic-diffusion controlled and the mass transport-limited ones. The mixed kinetic-diffusion controlled region, 0.85-0.79 V and 0.88-0.80 V vs. RHE are chosen to obtain the kinetic information for ORR on N-GNS and composite material, respectively. At low potentials, the mass transport-limited current becomes significant where a dependence of j upon rotation rate is observed. In fact, with increasing the rotation rate, the limiting current increased due to increase in the oxygen diffusion rate from bulk to the electrode surface. Thus, the overall measured j is, in fact, the sum of contributions of the kinetic current density, jk and the diffusion limiting current density, jd Both jk and jd can be analyzed from the RDE data using the Koutecky-Levich (K-L) equation (2) [21,45].
1/j = 1/jk+ 1/jd= 1/jk+ 1/Bω1/2= 1/jk+ 1/0.2nFCO2υ−1/6DO2/32ω1/2 | (2) |
where ω is the electrode rotation rate in revolutions per minute, B is Levich constant, n is the number of electrons transferred per O2 molecule, F is the Faraday constant (96485 C·mol−1), CO2 is the concentration of O2 in the bulk (8.4 × 10−4 mol·L−1), υ is the kinematic viscosity of the solution (1.1 × 10−2 cm2·s−1) and DO2 is the diffusion coefficient of oxygen (1.65 × 10−5 cm2·s−1) [21,46].
From Eq. (2), the K-L plots (j−1 vs. ω−1/2) were constructed for electrodes, N-GNS and 40% CoWO4/N-GNS (Figure 8a and 8b) and values of the intercept at 1/ω1/2 = 0 and the slope of each K-L curve were determined. Values of the intercept and slope, thus determined, were used to estimate values of jk, B, jd and n Table 2 & Table 3. In the construction of the K-L plots on composite electrode four rotations, namely 500, 800, 1200 and 1600 rpm have been considered while on N-GNS, only last three higher rotations (i.e., 800, 1200 and 1600 rpm) were considered.
The value of n is found to be 2.1-3.8 on N-GNS and 4.1-3.6 on 40% CoWO4/N-GNS in the voltage range of 0.85-0.79 V vs. RHE and 0.88-0.80 V, respectively (Table 2 & Table 3). Thus, results obtained on N-GNS show that at low overpotentials, n is close to 2 and the reduction of O2 produces HO2−. At the higher overpotentials n gradually increases, showing subsequent electrochemical reduction of HO2− to OH−. Similar results for the ORR study on electrochemically reduced graphene oxide were also observed by Bikkarolla et al. [47]. On the other hand, the ORR on composite follows a direct 4e− pathway. Recently, Bikkarolla et al. on Mn3O4/NrGO [48] and Seo et al. on 60%Pd/GNS and 60%Pt/GNS [49] also reported 4e− pathway of ORR in 0.1 M alkaline solution. The 4e− pathway of ORR on Pt has also been observed in several studies [21,50,51,52]
E/V | jk/mA·cm−2 | Slope (= 1/B)/mA−1·cm2·rpm1/2 | jd (= Bw1/2)/mA·cm−2 | n = no. of electrons |
0.850 | 0.74 | 4.88 | 8.19 | 2.1 |
0.839 | 0.87 | 5.48 | 7.29 | 2.4 |
0.827 | 1.09 | 7.30 | 5.48 | 3.2 |
0.817 | 1.27 | 7.35 | 5.44 | 3.3 |
0.810 | 1.38 | 7.49 | 5.34 | 3.4 |
0.801 | 1.63 | 8.33 | 4.80 | 3.7 |
0.790 | 1.85 | 8.40 | 4.76 | 3.8 |
E/V | jk/mA·cm−2 | Slope (= 1/B)/mA−1·cm2·rpm1/2 | jd (= Bw1/2)/mA·cm−2 | n = no. of electrons |
0.88 | 1.85 | 9.03 | 4.42 | 4.1 |
0.86 | 2.27 | 9.03 | 4.42 | 4.1 |
0.85 | 2.56 | 8.99 | 4.44 | 4.0 |
0.84 | 2.94 | 8.42 | 4.75 | 3.8 |
0.83 | 3.44 | 8.47 | 4.70 | 3.8 |
0.80 | 4.55 | 7.94 | 5.03 | 3.6 |
Chronoamperograms of the CoWO4, N-GNS and composite electrodes at E = 0.39 V vs. RHE were recorded in O2-saturated 1 M KOH for a period of 2 h and curves, so obtained, are reproduced in (Figure 9). This figure demonstrates that the stability of 40% CoWO4/N-GNS is superior to N-GNS (or CoWO4) under experimental conditions.
To examine the potential application of as-prepared 40% CoWO4/N-GNS nanocomposite as a super capacitor material, the cyclic voltammetry study of the composite and N-GNS has been performed at varying scan rates (10-400 mV·s−1) in 1 M KOH and results, so obtained, are shown in Figure 10. Both the electrodes exhibited approximately rectangular CV curves, indicating the double layer capacitive behavior. The observation of Figure 10 shows that the area under the anodic (or cathodic) curve at a scan rate is much higher for the composite electrode compared to pure N-GNS.
The specific capacitance (Cs·Fg−1) of the catalyst electrode at a particular scan rate was computed by determining the charge (Q/Coulomb) involved in the anodic process using the relation,
Cs = Q/(mΔE) | (3) |
where, “m” is the mass of the catalytic film in “g” and “ΔE” is the potential window in “V”employed to determine cyclic voltammograms.
The capacitance of the electrode determined using relation (3) has been shown as a function of scan rate in Figure 11a. This figure demonstrates that the capacitance of the composite, CoWO4/N-GNS is much higher than that of N-GNS. Further, the specific capacitance is maximum at the lowest scan rate in case of both electrodes. For instance, at 10 mV·s−1, estimates of Cs were 41.88 and 34.65 Fg−1 for electrodes, 40% CoWO4/N-GNS and N-GNS, respectively. The enhanced specific capacitance can be ascribed to the decrease in aggregation of N-doped graphene nano-sheets and better dispersion of the oxide nano-particles on the surface of N-GNS [40].
The long term cyclic performances of the composite and N-GNS were also examined in this study by repeating the CV between 0.926 V to 1.42 V (vs. RHE) at a scan rate of 200 mV·s−1 for 1000 cycles. The specific capacitance of N-GNS and composite electrodes as a function of cycle number is presented in Figure 11b. This figure clearly demonstrates that the composite electrode has better stability than N-GNS. For instance, over 1000 cycles at the scan rate of 200 mV·s−1, estimate of the capacity retention is 89% in the case of the composite electrode while it is only 73% in the case of N-GNS. This result indicates that the 40% CoWO4/N-GNS electrode is highly durable for electrochemical capacitor applications in 1 M KOH.
The activities of N-GNS and composite electrode toward O2 evolution reaction (OER) have also been examined in 1M KOH at 25 °C and results are shown in Figure 12. This figure shows that the composite electrode is OER active also. The N-GNS electrode is practically OER inactive one. The anodic Tafel plot (E vs. log j) for OER at the active electrode was also recorded at the scan rate of 1 mV·s−1 in the potential region from 1.615 to 1.820 V vs. RHE in 1 M KOH and the curve, so obtained, is reproduced in Figure 13. Estimates of the Tafel slope (b) and the overpotential (ȠO2) at the current density of 10 mA·cm−2 were 62 ± 3 mV and 418± 1 mV, respectively; two electrodes of the composite were used for the investigation.
The study has indicated that the composite of N-GNS with 40% CoWO4 has greatly enhanced capacitance as well as ORR activity compared to its constituent compounds, N-GNS and CoWO4 in 1M KOH. The composite electrode is OER active, on the contrary, the N-GNS electrode is OER inactive one. A significant increase in catalytic activity of the composite towards ORR can be attributed to the existence of a strong interaction between N-GNS and CoWO4 in the composite resulting in increase of pyridinic-N and graphitic-N and decrease of pyrrolic-N contents in the composite. The stability of novel composite material is also superior to N-GNS. Thus, the 40% CoWO4/N-GNS can be used at a good bi-functional oxygen electrode material. It has also good cyclic stability for potential applications as super capacitor electrodes. So, there seems possibility of developing promising materials with suitable combinations of transition metal oxides and N-GNS for use in high performance super capacitors as well as fuel cells.
The authors acknowledge the support received by the University Grants Commission (F.No.18-1/2011BSR) & (UGC-BSR/RFSMS/434), Government of India to carry out the research work.
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this manuscript.
[1] |
Y. Wu, H. Chen, G. Jiang, Z. Mo, D. Ye, M. Wang, et al., Genome-wide association study (GWAS) of germline copy number variations (CNVs) reveal genetic risks of prostate cancer in Chinese population, J. Cancer, 9 (2018), 923–928. https://doi.org/10.7150/jca.22802 doi: 10.7150/jca.22802
![]() |
[2] |
M. Matuszczak, J. A. Schalken, M. J. C. Salagierski, Prostate cancer liquid biopsy biomarkers' clinical utility in diagnosis and prognosis, Cancers, 13 (2021), 3373. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13133373 doi: 10.3390/cancers13133373
![]() |
[3] |
J. Xiang, H. Yan, J. Li, X. Wang, H. Chen, X. Zheng, Transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis, World J. Surg. Oncol., 17 (2019), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-019-1573-0 doi: 10.1186/s12957-019-1573-0
![]() |
[4] |
X. Dai, Y. Zhang, J. Jiang, B. Li, Image‐guided robots for low dose rate prostate brachytherapy: Perspectives on safety in design and use, Int. J. Med. Rob. Comput. Assisted Surg., 17 (2021), e2239. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.2239 doi: 10.1002/rcs.2239
![]() |
[5] |
P. Mohan, H. Ho, J. Yuen, W. S. Ng, W. S. Cheng, A 3D computer simulation to study the efficacy of transperineal versus transrectal biopsy of the prostate, Int. J. Comput. Assisted Radiol. Surg., 1 (2007), 351–360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-007-0069-5 doi: 10.1007/s11548-007-0069-5
![]() |
[6] |
D. Batura, G. G. Rao, The national burden of infections after prostate biopsy in England and Wales: a wake-up call for better prevention, J. Antimicrob. Chemother., 68 (2013), 247–249. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dks401 doi: 10.1093/jac/dks401
![]() |
[7] |
P. Emiliozzi, A. Corsetti, B. Tassi, G. Federico, M. Martini, V. Pansadoro, Best approach for prostate cancer detection: a prospective study on transperineal versus transrectal six-core prostate biopsy, Urology, 61 (2003), 961–966. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-4295(02)02551-7 doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(02)02551-7
![]() |
[8] |
K. K. Hodge, J. E. McNeal, M. K. Terris, T. A. Stamey, Random systematic versus directed ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the prostate, J. Urol., 142 (1989), 71–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(17)38664-0 doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)38664-0
![]() |
[9] | P. Tucan, F. Craciun, C. Vaida, B. Gherman, D. Pisla, C. Radu, et al., Development of a control system for an innovative parallel robot used in prostate biopsy, in 2017 21st International Conference on Control Systems and Computer Science (CSCS), IEEE, (2017), 76–83. https://doi.org/10.1109/CSCS.2017.17 |
[10] |
A. Rovetta, R. Sala, Execution of robot-assisted biopsies within the clinical context, J. Image Guided Surg., 1 (1995), 280–287. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1522-712X(1995)1:5<280::AID-IGS4>3.0.CO;2-6 doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1522-712X(1995)1:5<280::AID-IGS4>3.0.CO;2-6
![]() |
[11] |
L. Phee, J. Yuen, D. Xiao, C. F. Chan, H. HO, C. H. Thng, et al., Ultrasound guided robotic biopsy of the prostate, Int. J. Humanoid Rob., 3 (2006), 463–483. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219843606000850 doi: 10.1142/S0219843606000850
![]() |
[12] |
K. A. Roehl, J. A. V. Antenor, W. J. Catalona, Serial biopsy results in prostate cancer screening study, J. Urol., 167 (2002), 2435–2439. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64999-3 doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64999-3
![]() |
[13] |
M. K. Terris, E. M. Wallen, T. A. Stamey, Comparison of mid-lobe versus lateral systematic sextant biopsies in the detection of prostate cancer, Urol. Int., 59 (1997), 239–242. https://doi.org/10.1159/000283071 doi: 10.1159/000283071
![]() |
[14] |
D. W. Keetch, J. M. McMurtry, D. S. Smith, G. L. Andriole, W. J. Catalona, et al., Prostate specific antigen density versus prostate specific antigen slope as predictors of prostate cancer in men with initially negative prostatic biopsies, J. Urol., 156 (1996), 428–431. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(01)65868-3 doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)65868-3
![]() |
[15] |
M. K. Terris, J. E. McNeal, F. S Freiha, T. A. Stamey, Efficacy of transrectal ultrasound-guided seminal vesicle biopsies in the detection of seminal vesicle invasion by prostate cancer, J. Urol., 149 (1993), 1035–1039. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(17)36290-0 doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)36290-0
![]() |
[16] | J. C. Presti, Prostate cancer: Assessment of risk using digital rectal examination, tumor grade, prostate-specific antigen, and systematic biopsy, Radiol. Clin. N. Am., 38 (2000), 49–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0033-8389(05)70149-4 |
[17] |
I. H. A. E. Ahmed, H. G. E. Mohamed Ali Hassan, M. E. G. Abo ElMaaty, S. E. M. E. E. Metwally, Role of MRI in diagnosis of prostate cancer and correlation of results with transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy "TRUS", Egypt. J. Radiol. Nucl. Med., 53 (2022), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43055-022-00755-7 doi: 10.1186/s43055-022-00755-7
![]() |
[18] |
P. Blumenfeld, N. Hata, S. DiMaio, K. Zou, S. Haker, G, Fichtinger, et al., Transperineal prostate biopsy under magnetic resonance image guidance: a needle placement accuracy study, J. Magn. Reson. Imaging, 26 (2007), 688–694. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.21067 doi: 10.1002/jmri.21067
![]() |
[19] |
K. M. Chan, J. M. Gleadle, M. O'Callaghan, K. Vasilev, M. MacGregor, Prostate cancer detection: A systematic review of urinary biosensors, Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis., 25 (2022), 39–46. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-021-00480-8 doi: 10.1038/s41391-021-00480-8
![]() |
[20] | A. Afshar-Oromieh, U. Haberkorn, H. P. Schlemmer, M. Fenchel, M. Eder, M. Eisenhut, et al., Comparison of PET/CT and PET/MRI hybrid systems using a 68Ga-labelled PSMA ligand for the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer: initial experience, Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging, 41 (2014), 887–897. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-013-2660-z |
[21] |
S. Shoji, S. Hiraiwa, T. Ogawa, M. Kawakami, M. Nakano, K. Hashida, et al., Accuracy of real-time magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion image-guided transperineal target biopsy with needle tracking with a mechanical position-encoded stepper in detecting significant prostate cancer in biopsy-naive men, Int. J. Urol., 24 (2017), 288–294. https://doi.org/10.1111/iju.13306 doi: 10.1111/iju.13306
![]() |
[22] |
S. Shoji, Magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion image-guided prostate biopsy: current status of the cancer detection and the prospects of tailor-made medicine of the prostate cancer, Investig. Clin. Urol., 60 (2019), 4–13. https://doi.org/10.4111/icu.2019.60.1.4 doi: 10.4111/icu.2019.60.1.4
![]() |
[23] |
C. J. Das, A. Razik, A. Netaji, S. Verma, Prostate MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy: A review of the state of the art procedure, Abdom. Radiol., 45 (2020), 2176–2183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-019-02391-8 doi: 10.1007/s00261-019-02391-8
![]() |
[24] |
J. Hanske, Y. Risse, F. Roghmann, D. Pucheril, S. Berg, K. H. Tully, et al., Comparison of prostate cancer detection rates in patients undergoing MRI/TRUS fusion prostate biopsy with two different software-based systems, Prostate, 82 (2022), 227–234. https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.24264 doi: 10.1002/pros.24264
![]() |
[25] |
J. Zhang, A. Zhu, D. Sun, S. Guo, H. Zhang, S. Liu, et al., Is targeted magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy enough for the detection of prostate cancer in patients with PI-RADS > = 3: Results of a prospective, randomized clinical trial, J. Cancer Res. Ther., 16 (2020), 1698–1702. https://doi.org/10.4103/jcrt.JCRT_1495_20 doi: 10.4103/jcrt.JCRT_1495_20
![]() |
[26] |
L. Wang, Y. Zhang, S. Zuo, Y. Xu, A review of the research progress of interventional medical equipment and methods for prostate cancer, Int. J. Med. Rob. Comput. Assisted Surg., 17 (2021), e2303. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.2303 doi: 10.1002/rcs.2303
![]() |
[27] | X. Zhang, H. Du, M. Lu, Y. Zhang, Breast intervention surgery robot under image navigation: A review, Adv. Mech. Eng., 13 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1177/16878140211028113 |
[28] |
J. Tokuda, S. E. Song, G. S. Fischer, I. I. Iordachita, R. Seifabadi, N. B. Cho, et al., Preclinical evaluation of an MRI-compatible pneumatic robot for angulated needle placement in transperineal prostate interventions, Int. J. Comput. Assisted Radiol. Surg., 7 (2012), 949–957. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-012-0750-1 doi: 10.1007/s11548-012-0750-1
![]() |
[29] | J. Tokuda, G. S. Fischer, C. Csoma, S. P. DiMaio, D. G. Gobbi, G. Fichtinger, et al., Software strategy for robotic transperineal prostate therapy in closed-bore MRI, in 2008 11th International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention (MICCAI2008), Springer, (2008), 701–709. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-85990-1_84 |
[30] |
A. J. Krafft, P. Zamecnik, F. Maier, A. de Oliveira, P. Hallscheidt, H. P. Schlemmer, et al., Passive marker tracking via phase-only cross correlation (POCC) for MR-guided needle interventions: Initial in vivo experience, Physica Med., 29 (2013), 607–614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2012.09.002 doi: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2012.09.002
![]() |
[31] | R. Seifabadi, S. E. Song, A. Krieger, N. Cho, J. Tokuda, G. Fichtinger, et al., Robotic system for MRI-guided prostate biopsy: Feasibility of teleoperated needle insertion and ex vivo phantom study, Int. J. Comput. Assisted Radiol. Surg., 7 (2012), 181–190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-011-0598-9 |
[32] | A. Krieger, I. Iordachita, S. E. Song, N. B. Cho, P. Guion, G. Fichtinger, et al., Development and preliminary evaluation of an actuated MRI-compatible robotic device for MRI-guided prostate intervention, in 2010 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), IEEE, (2010), 1066–1073. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROBOT.2010.5509727 |
[33] | K. Y. Kim, M. Li, B. Gonenc, W. Shang, S. Eslami, I. L. Iordachita, Design of an MRI-compatible modularized needle driver for In-bore MRI-guided prostate interventions, in 2015 15th International Conference on Control, Automation and Systems (ICCAS), IEEE, (2015), 1520–1525. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCAS.2015.7364595 |
[34] |
N. A. Patel, G. Li, W. Shang, M. Wartenberg, T. Heffter, E. C. Burdette, et al., System integration and preliminary clinical evaluation of a robotic system for MRI-guided transperineal prostate biopsy, J. Med. Rob. Res., 4 (2019), 1950001. https://doi.org/10.1142/S2424905X19500016 doi: 10.1142/S2424905X19500016
![]() |
[35] | G. Fichtinger, A. Krieger, R. C. Susil, A. Tanacs, L. L. Whitcomb, E. Atalar, Transrectal prostate biopsy inside closed MRI scanner with remote actuation, under real-time image guidance, in 5th International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-assisted Intervention, Springer, (2002), 91–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45786-0_12 |
[36] |
A. Krieger, R. C. Susil, C. Ménard, J. A. Coleman, G. Fichtinger, E. Atalar, et al., Design of a novel MRI compatible manipulator for image guided prostate interventions, IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., 52 (2005), 306–313. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2004.840497 doi: 10.1109/TBME.2004.840497
![]() |
[37] | E. Balogh, A. Deguet, R. C. Susil, A. Krieger, A. Viswanathan, C. Menard, et al., Visualization, planning, and monitoring software for MRI-guided prostate intervention robot, in 7th International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-assisted Intervention (MICCAI 2004), Springer, (2004), 73–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30136-3_10 |
[38] |
A. Krieger, I. I. Iordachita, P. Guion, A. K. Singh, A. Kaushal, C. Menard, et al., An MRI-compatible robotic system with hybrid tracking for MRI-guided prostate intervention, IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., 58 (2011), 3049–3060. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2011.2134096 doi: 10.1109/TBME.2011.2134096
![]() |
[39] |
A. Krieger, S. E. Song, N. B. Cho, I. I. Iordachita, P. Guion, G. Fichtinger, et al., Development and evaluation of an actuated MRI-compatible robotic system for MRI-guided prostate intervention, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron., 18 (2011), 273–284. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMECH.2011.2163523 doi: 10.1109/TMECH.2011.2163523
![]() |
[40] | J. Bohren, I. Iordachita, L. L. Whitcomb, Design requirements and feasibility study for a 3-DOF MRI-compatible robotic device for MRI-guided prostate intervention, in 2012 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), IEEE, (2012), 677–682. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRA.2012.6225260 |
[41] |
H. Elhawary, A. Zivanovic, M. Rea, B. L. Davies, C. Besant, D. McRobbie, et al., A modular approach to MRI-compatible robotics, IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Mag., 27 (2008), 35–41. https://doi.org/10.1109/EMB.2007.910260 doi: 10.1109/EMB.2007.910260
![]() |
[42] |
M. Rea, D. McRobbie, H. Elhawary, Z. T. H. Tse, M. Lamperth, I. Young, System for 3-D real-time tracking of MRI-compatible devices by image processing, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron., 13 (2008), 379–382. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMECH.2008.924132 doi: 10.1109/TMECH.2008.924132
![]() |
[43] |
H. Elhawary, Z. T. H. Tse, M. Rea, A. Zivanovic, B. L. Davies, C. Besant, et al., Robotic system for transrectal biopsy of the prostate: real-time guidance under MRI, IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Mag., 29 (2010), 78–86. https://doi.org/10.1109/MEMB.2009.935709 doi: 10.1109/MEMB.2009.935709
![]() |
[44] |
A. A. Goldenberg, J. Trachtenberg, W. Kucharczyk, Y. Yi, M. Haider, L. Ma, et al., Robotic system for closed-bore MRI-guided prostatic interventions, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron., 13 (2008), 374–379. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMECH.2008.924122 doi: 10.1109/TMECH.2008.924122
![]() |
[45] |
A. A. Goldenberg, J. Trachtenberg, Y. Yi, R. Weersink, M. S. Sussman, M. Haider, et al., Robot-assisted MRI-guided prostatic interventions, Robotica, 28 (2010), 215–234. https://doi.org/10.1017/S026357470999066X doi: 10.1017/S026357470999066X
![]() |
[46] |
G. S. Fischer, I. Iordachita, C. Csoma, J. Tokuda, S. P. DiMaio, C. M. Tempany, et al., MRI-compatible pneumatic robot for transperineal prostate needle placement, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron., 13 (2008), 295–305. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMECH.2008.924044 doi: 10.1109/TMECH.2008.924044
![]() |
[47] |
J. Tokuda, G. S. Fischer, S. P. DiMaio, D. G. Gobbi, C. Csoma, P. W. Mewes, et al., Integrated navigation and control software system for MRI-guided robotic prostate interventions, Comput. Med. Imaging Graphics, 34 (2010), 3–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compmedimag.2009.07.004 doi: 10.1016/j.compmedimag.2009.07.004
![]() |
[48] | G. S. Fischer, I. Iordachita, C. Csoma, J. Tokuda, P. W. Mewes, Pneumatically operated MRI-compatible needle placement robot for prostate interventions, in 2008 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, IEEE, (2008), 2489–2495. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROBOT.2008.4543587 |
[49] |
M. G. Schouten, J. Ansems, W. K. J. Renema, D. Bosboom, T. W. J. Scheenen, J. J. Futterer, The accuracy and safety aspects of a novel robotic needle guide manipulator to perform transrectal prostate biopsies, Med. Phys., 37 (2010), 4744–4750. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3475945 doi: 10.1118/1.3475945
![]() |
[50] |
D. Yakar, M. G. Schouten, D. G. H. Bosboom, J. O. Barentsz, T. W. J. Scheenen, J. J. Fuetterer, Feasibility of a pneumatically actuated MR-compatible robot for transrectal prostate biopsy guidance, Radiology, 260 (2011), 241–247. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.11101106 doi: 10.1148/radiol.11101106
![]() |
[51] |
M. G. Schouten, J. G. R. Bomers, D. Yakar, H. Huisman, E. Rothgang, D. Bosboom, et al., Evaluation of a robotic technique for transrectal MRI-guided prostate biopsies, Eur. Radiol., 22 (2012), 476–483. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-011-2259-3 doi: 10.1007/s00330-011-2259-3
![]() |
[52] | S. E. Song, N. B. Cho, G. Fischer, N. Hata, C. Tempany, G. Fichtinger, et al., Development of a pneumatic robot for MRI-guided transperineal prostate biopsy and brachytherapy: New approaches, in 2010 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), IEEE, (2010), 2580–2585. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROBOT.2010.5509710 |
[53] | S. E. Song, N. Cho, J. Tokuda, N. Hata, C. Tempany, G. Fichtinger, et al., Preliminary evaluation of a MRI-compatible modular robotic system for MRI-guided prostate interventions, in 2010 3rd IEEE RAS and EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics, IEEE, (2010), 796–801. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.21259 |
[54] |
S. E. Song, N. Hata, I. Iordachita, G. Fichtinger, C. Tempany, J. Tokuda, A workspace‐orientated needle‐guiding robot for 3T MRI‐guided transperineal prostate intervention: evaluation of in‐bore workspace and MRI compatibility, Int. J. Med. Rob. Comput. Assisted Surg., 9 (2013), 67–74. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.1430 doi: 10.1002/rcs.1430
![]() |
[55] | R. Seifabadi, I. Iordachita, G. Fichtinger, Design of a teleoperated needle steering system for MRI-guided prostate interventions, in 2012 4th IEEE RAS and EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics (BioRob), IEEE, (2012), 793–798. https://doi.org/10.1109/BioRob.2012.6290862 |
[56] |
R. Seifabadi, F. Aalamifar, I. Iordachita, G. Fichtinger, Toward teleoperated needle steering under continuous MRI guidance for prostate percutaneous interventions, Int. J. Med. Rob. Comput. Assisted Surg., 12 (2016), 355–369. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.1692 doi: 10.1002/rcs.1692
![]() |
[57] | H. Su, D. C. Cardona, W. J. Shang, A. Camilo, G. A. Cole, D. C. Rucker, et al., A MRI-guided concentric tube continuum robot with piezoelectric actuation: A feasibility study, in 2012 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), IEEE, (2012), 1939–1945. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRA.2012.6224550 |
[58] | W. Shang, S. Hao, L. Gang, C. Furlong, G. S. Fischer, A fabry-perot interferometry based MRI-Compatible miniature uniaxial force sensor for percutaneous needle placement, IEEE Sens. J., (2013), 57–60. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSENS.2013.6688137 |
[59] | G. Li, H. Su, W. Shang, J. Tokuda, N. Hata, C. M. Tempany, et al., A fully actuated robotic assistant for MRI-guided prostate biopsy and brachytherapy, in Conference on Medical Imaging-image-guided Procedures, Robotic Interventions, and Modeling, SPIE, (2013), 867117. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2007669 |
[60] | S. Eslami, G. S. Fischer, S. E. Song, J. Tokuda, N. Hata, C. M. Tempany, et al., Towards clinically optimized MRI-guided surgical manipulator for minimally invasive prostate percutaneous interventions: constructive design, in 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), IEEE, (2013), 1228–1233. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRA.2013.6630728 |
[61] |
S. Eslami, W. Shang, G. Li, N. Patel, G. S. Fischer, J. Tokuda, et al., In‐bore prostate transperineal interventions with an MRI‐guided parallel manipulator: System development and preliminary evaluation, Int. J. Med. Rob. Comput. Assisted Surg., 12 (2016), 199–213. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.1671 doi: 10.1002/rcs.1671
![]() |
[62] | M. Li, B. Gonenc, K. Kim, W. Shang, I. Iordachita, Development of an MRI-compatible needle driver for in-bore prostate biopsy, in International Conference on Advanced Robotics (ICAR), IEEE, (2015), 130–136. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICAR.2015.7251445 |
[63] | Y. Wang, S. Kim, E. C. Burdette, P. Kazanzides, I. Iordachita, Robotic system with multiplex power transmission for MRI-guided percutaneous interventions, in 2016 38th Annual International Conference of the IEEE-Engineering-in-Medicine-and-Biology-Society (EMBC), IEEE, (2016), 5228–5232. https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC.2016.7591906 |
[64] |
D. Stoianovici, C. Kim, G. Srimathveeravalli, P. Sebrecht, D. Petrisor, J. Coleman, et al., MRI-safe robot for endorectal prostate biopsy, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron., 19 (2013), 1289–1299. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMECH.2013.2279775 doi: 10.1109/TMECH.2013.2279775
![]() |
[65] |
D. Stoianovici, C. Jun, S. Lim, P. Li, D. Petrisor, S. Fricke, et al., Multi-imager compatible, MR safe, remote center of motion needle-guide robot, IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., 65 (2017), 165–177. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2017.2697766 doi: 10.1109/TBME.2017.2697766
![]() |
[66] |
L. Chen, T. Paetz, V. Dicken, S. Krass, J. A. Issawi, D. Ojdanic, et al., Design of a dedicated five degree-of-freedom magnetic resonance imaging compatible robot for image guided prostate biopsy, J. Med. Devices, 9 (2015), 015002. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4029506 doi: 10.1115/1.4029506
![]() |
[67] |
D. Stoianovici, C. Kim, D. Petrisor, C. Jun, S. Lim, M. W. Ball, et al., MR safe robot, FDA clearance, safety and feasibility of prostate biopsy clinical trial, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron., 22 (2016), 115–126. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMECH.2016.2618362 doi: 10.1109/TMECH.2016.2618362
![]() |
[68] |
M. W. Ball, A. E. Ross, K. Ghabili, C. Kim, C. Jun, D. Petrisor, et al., Safety and feasibility of direct magnetic resonance imaging-guided transperineal prostate biopsy using a novel magnetic resonance imaging-safe robotic device, Urology, 109 (2017), 216–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2017.07.010 doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2017.07.010
![]() |
[69] |
A. M. Aleong, T. Looi, K. V. Luo, Z. Zou, A. Waspe, S. Singh, et al., Preliminary study of a modular MR-compatible robot for image-guided insertion of multiple needles, Front. Oncol., 12 (2022), 829369. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.829369 doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.829369
![]() |
[70] |
P. Biswas, H. Dehghani, S. Sikander, S. E. Song, Kinematic and mechanical modelling of a novel 4-DOF robotic needle guide for MRI-guided prostate intervention, Biomed. Eng. Adv., 4 (2022), 100036. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bea.2022.100036 doi: 10.1016/j.bea.2022.100036
![]() |
[71] | K. Y. Kim, H. S. Woo, J. H. Cho, Y. K. Lee, Development of a two DOF needle driver for CT-guided needle insertion-type interventional robotic system, in 2017 26th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), IEEE, (2017), 470–475. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2017.8172344 |
[72] |
D. Stoianovici, A. Patriciu, D. Petrisor, D. Mazilu, L. Kavoussi, A new type of motor: pneumatic step motor, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron., 12 (2007), 98–106. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMECH.2006.886258 doi: 10.1109/TMECH.2006.886258
![]() |
[73] |
E. Mendoza, J. P. Whitney, A testbed for haptic and magnetic resonance imaging-guided percutaneous needle biopsy, IEEE Rob. Autom. Lett., 4 (2019), 3177–3183. https://doi.org/10.1109/LRA.2019.2925558 doi: 10.1109/LRA.2019.2925558
![]() |
[74] | Y. Wang, H. Su, K. Harrington, G. S. Fischer, Sliding mode control of piezoelectric valve regulated pneumatic actuator for MRI-compatible robotic intervention, in ASME Dynamic Systems and Control Conference, ASME, (2010), 23–28. https://doi.org/10.1115/DSCC2010-4203 |
[75] | K. Tadakuma, L. M. DeVita, J. S. Plante, Y. Shaoze, S. Dubowsky, The experimental study of a precision parallel manipulator with binary actuation: With application to MRI cancer treatment, in 2018 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, IEEE, (2008), 2503–2508. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROBOT.2008.4543589 |
[76] | J. S. Plante, K. Tadakuma, L. M. DeVita, D. F. Kacher, J. R. Roebuck, S. P. DiMaio, et al., An MRI-compatible needle manipulator concept based on elastically averaged dielectric elastomer actuators for prostate cancer treatment: An accuracy and MR-compatibility evaluation in phantoms, J. Med. Devices, 3 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3191729 |
[77] | S. Proulx, P. Chouinard, J. P. L. Bigue, J. S. Plante, Design of a binary needle manipulator using elastically averaged air muscles for prostate cancer treatments, in ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences, ASME, (2009), 123–132. https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2009-86480 |
[78] | S. Proulx, G. Miron, A. Girard, J. S. Plante, Experimental validation of an elastically averaged binary manipulator for MRI-guided prostate cancer interventions, in ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences, ASME, (2010), 409–418. https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2010-28235 |
[79] | S. Proulx, J. S. Plante, Design and experimental assessment of an elastically averaged binary manipulator using pneumatic air muscles for magnetic resonance imaging guided prostate interventions, J. Mech. Des., 133 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4004983 |
[80] | G. Miron, A, Girard, J. S. Plante, M. Lepage, Design and manufacturing of embedded pneumatic actuators for an MRI-Compatible prostate cancer binary manipulator, in ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences, ASME, (2012), 1133–1142. https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2012-71380 |
[81] | G. Miron, A. Girard, J. S. Plante, M. Lepage, Design and manufacturing of embedded air-muscles for a magnetic resonance imaging compatible prostate cancer binary manipulator, J. Mech. Des., 135 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4007932 |
[82] | R. Gassert, A. Yamamoto, D. Chapuis, L. Dovat, H. Bleuler, E. Burdet, Actuation methods for applications in MR environments, Concepts Magn. Reson. Part B, 29 (2006), 191–209. https://doi.org/10.1002/cmr.b.20070 |
[83] | H. Su, G. A. Cole, G. S. Fischer, High-field MRI-compatible needle placement robots for prostate interventions: pneumatic and piezoelectric approaches, J. Mech. Des., 26 (2012), 21–32. |
[84] |
E. Hempel, H. Fischer, L. Gumb, T. Hohn, H. Krause, U. Voges, et al., An MRI-compatible surgical robot for precise radiological interventions, Comput. Aided Surg., 8 (2003), 180–191. https://doi.org/10.3109/10929080309146052 doi: 10.3109/10929080309146052
![]() |
[85] |
H. Su, A. Camilo, G. A. Cole, N. Hata, C. M. Tempany, G. S. Fischer, High-field MRI-compatible needle placement robot for prostate interventions, Mech. Des., 163 (2011), 623–629. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-60750-706-2-623 doi: 10.3233/978-1-60750-706-2-623
![]() |
[86] | J. D. Velazco-Garcia, N. V. Navkar, S. Balakrishnan, J. Abinahed, A. Al-Ansari, G. Younes, et al., Preliminary evaluation of robotic transrectal biopsy system on an interventional planning software, in 19th Annual IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Bioengineering (BIBE), IEEE, (2019), 357–362. https://doi.org/10.1109/BIBE.2019.00070 |
[87] | P. C. Mozer, A. W. Partin, D. Stoianovici, Robotic image-guided needle interventions of the prostate, Urology, 11 (2009), 7–15. |
[88] | L. Phee, X. Di, J. Yuen, C. F. Chan, H. Ho, C. H. Thng, et al., Ultrasound guided robotic system for transperineal biopsy of the prostate, in IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), IEEE, (2005), 1315–1320. |
[89] |
H. S. S. Ho, P, Mohan, E. D. Lim, D. L. Li, S. P. Yuen, W. S. Ng, et al., Robotic ultrasound‐guided prostate intervention device: system description and results from phantom studies, Int. J. Med. Rob. Comput. Assisted Surg., 5 (2009), 51–58. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.232 doi: 10.1002/rcs.232
![]() |
[90] |
H. Ho, J. S. P. Yuen, P. Mohan, E. W. Lim, C. W. S. Cheng, Robotic transperineal prostate biopsy: Pilot clinical study, Urology, 78 (2011), 1203–1208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2011.07.1389 doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2011.07.1389
![]() |
[91] |
Y. Zhang, F. Liu, Y. Yu, Structural design of prostate biopsy robot based on TRIZ theory, J. Med. Devices, 72 (2012), 3176–3181. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.538-541.3176 doi: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.538-541.3176
![]() |
[92] |
J. A. Long, N. Hungr, M. Baumann, J. L. Descotes, M. Bolla, J. Y. Giraud, et al., Development of a novel robot for transperineal needle based interventions: Focal therapy, brachytherapy and prostate biopsies, J. Urol., 188 (2012), 1369–1374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.06.003 doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.06.003
![]() |
[93] | C. Poquet, P. Mozer, G. Morel, M. A. Vitrani, A novel comanipulation device for assisting needle placement in ultrasound guided prostate biopsies, in 2013 IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), IEEE, (2013), 4084–4091. https://doi.org/10.1109/IROS.2013.6696941 |
[94] |
C. Poquet, P. Mozer, M. A.Vitrani, G. Morel, An endorectal ultrasound probe comanipulator with hybrid actuation combining brakes and motors, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron., 20 (2015), 186–196. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMECH.2014.2314859 doi: 10.1109/TMECH.2014.2314859
![]() |
[95] | M. A. Vitrani, J. Troccaz, A. S. Silvent, S. Y. Selmi, J. Sarrazin, D. Reversat, et al., PROSBOT–Model and image controlled prostatic robot, IRBM, 36 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irbm.2015.01.012 |
[96] |
M. A. Vitrani, M. Baumann, D. Reversat, G. Morel, A. Moreau-Gaudry, P. Mozer, Prostate biopsies assisted by comanipulated probe-holder: first in man, Int. J. Comput. Assisted Radiol. Surg., 11 (2016), 1153–1161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-016-1399-y doi: 10.1007/s11548-016-1399-y
![]() |
[97] | S. Lim, C. Jun, D. Chang, D. Petrisor, M. Han, D. Stoianovici, Robotic transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy, IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., 66 (2019), 2527–2537. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2019.2891240 |
[98] |
J. Yan, B. Pan, Y. Fu, Ultrasound-guided prostate percutaneous intervention robot system and calibration by informative particle swarm optimization, Front. Mech. Eng., 17 (2022), 3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11465-021-0659-x doi: 10.1007/s11465-021-0659-x
![]() |
[99] |
C. Thoma, MRI/TRUS fusion outperforms standard and combined biopsy approaches, Nat. Rev. Urol., 12 (2015), 119. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2015.28 doi: 10.1038/nrurol.2015.28
![]() |
[100] |
T. P. Frye, P. A. Pinto, A. K. George, Optimizing patient population for MP-MRI and fusion biopsy for prostate cancer detection, Curr. Urol. Rep., 16 (2015), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-015-0521-y doi: 10.1007/s11934-015-0521-y
![]() |
[101] |
D. Pisla, P. Tucan, B. Gherman, N. Crisan, I. Andras, C. Vaida, et al., Development of a parallel robotic system for transperineal biopsy of the prostate, Mech. Sci., 8 (2017), 195–213. https://doi.org/10.5194/ms-8-195-2017 doi: 10.5194/ms-8-195-2017
![]() |
[102] | P. Tucan, C. Vaida, B. Gherman, F. Craciun, N. Plitea, I. Birlescu, et al., Control system of a medical parallel robot for transperineal prostate biopsy, in 2017 21st International Conference on System Theory, Control and Computing (ICSTCC), IEEE, (2017), 206–211. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSTCC.2017.8107035 |
[103] | D. Pisla, D. Ani, C. Vaida, B. Gherman, P. Tucan, N. Plitea, BIO-PROS-2: An innovative parallel robotic structure for transperineal prostate biopsy, in IEEE International Conference on Automation, Quality and Testing, Robotics (AQTR), IEEE, (2016), 157–162. https://doi.org/10.1109/AQTR.2016.7501308 |
[104] |
B. Maris, C. Tenga, R. Vicario, L. Palladino, N. Murr, M. De Piccoli, et al., Toward autonomous robotic prostate biopsy: a pilot study, Int. J. Comput. Assisted Radiol. Surg., 16 (2021), 1393–1401. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-021-02437-7 doi: 10.1007/s11548-021-02437-7
![]() |
[105] |
W. Wang, B. Pan, Y. Fu, Y. Liu, Development of a transperineal prostate biopsy robot guided by MRI-TRUS image, Int. J. Med. Rob. Comput. Assisted Surg., 17 (2021), e2266. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.2266 doi: 10.1002/rcs.2266
![]() |
[106] |
X. Xiao, Y. Wu, Q. Wu, H. Ren, Concurrently bendable and rotatable continuum tubular robot for omnidirectional multi-core transurethral prostate biopsy, Med. Biol. Eng. Comput., 60 (2021), 229–238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-021-02434-7 doi: 10.1007/s11517-021-02434-7
![]() |
[107] |
X. Xiao, C. Li, X. Gu, Y. Yan, Y. Wu, Q. Wu, et al., A tubular dual-roller bending mechanism towards robotic transurethral prostate biopsy, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron., 1 (2020), 99–108. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMECH.2020.3040749 doi: 10.1109/TMECH.2020.3040749
![]() |
[108] |
H. Li, P. Wu, Z. Wang, J. Mao, F. E. Alsaadi, N. Zeng, A generalized framework of feature learning enhanced convolutional neural network for pathology-image-oriented cancer diagnosis, Comput. Biol. Med., 151 (2022), 106265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2022.106265 doi: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2022.106265
![]() |
[109] |
S. Alkhalaf, F. Alturise, A. A. Bahaddad, B. M. E. Elnaim, S. Shabana, S. Abdel-Khalek, et al., Adaptive aquila optimizer with explainable artificial intelligence-enabled cancer diagnosis on medical imaging, Cancers, 15 (2023), 1492. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15051492 doi: 10.3390/cancers15051492
![]() |
[110] |
P. Wu, Z. Wang, B. Zheng, H. Li, F. E. Alsaadi, N. Zeng, AGGN: Attention-based glioma grading network with multi-scale feature extraction and multi-modal information fusion, Comput. Biol. Med., 152 (2023), 106457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2022.106457 doi: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2022.106457
![]() |
[111] |
K. S. Pradhan, P. Chawla, R. Tiwari, HRDEL: High ranking deep ensemble learning-based lung cancer diagnosis model, Expert Syst. Appl., 213 (2023), 118956. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2022.118956 doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2022.118956
![]() |
[112] |
H. Li, N. Zeng, P. Wu, K. Clawson, Cov-Net: A computer-aided diagnosis method for recognizing COVID-19 from chest X-ray images via machine vision, Expert Syst. Appl., 207 (2022), 118029. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2022.118029 doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2022.118029
![]() |
[113] |
S. P. Dimaio, S. Pieper, K. Chinzei, N. Hata, S. J. Haker, D. F. Kacher, et al., Robot-assisted needle placement in open MRI: System architecture, integration and validation, Comput. Aided Surg., 12 (2007), 15–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/10929080601168254 doi: 10.1080/10929080601168254
![]() |
[114] | P. W. Mewes, J. Tokuda, S. P. DiMaio, G. S. Fischer, C. Csoma, D. G. Gobbi, et al., Integrated system for robot-assisted in prostate biopsy in closed MRI scanner, in 2008 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, IEEE, (2008), 2959–2962. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROBOT.2008.4543659 |
[115] | N. A. Patel, T. van Katwijk, G. Li, P. Moreira, W. Shang, S. Misra, et al., Closed-loop asymmetric-tip needle steering under continuous intraoperative MRI guidance, in 2015 37th Annual International Conference of the IEEE-Engineering-in-Medicine-and-Biology-Society (EMBC), IEEE, (2015), 4869–4874. https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC.2015.7319484 |
[116] |
C. Qin, P. Tu, X. Chen, J. Troccaz, A novel registration-based algorithm for prostate segmentation via the combination of SSM and CNN, Med. Phys., 49 (2022), 5268–5282. https://doi.org/10.1002/mp.15698 doi: 10.1002/mp.15698
![]() |
[117] |
Z. Wang, R. Wu, Y. Xu, Y. Liu, R. Chai, H. Ma, A two-stage CNN method for MRI image segmentation of prostate with lesion, Biomed. Signal Process. Control, 82 (2023), 104610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bspc.2023.104610 doi: 10.1016/j.bspc.2023.104610
![]() |
[118] |
Z. Li, J. Fang, R. Qiu, H. Gong, W. Zhang, L. Li, et al., CDA-Net: A contrastive deep adversarial model for prostate cancer segmentation in MRI images, Biomed. Signal Process. Control, 83 (2023), 104622. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bspc.2023.104622 doi: 10.1016/j.bspc.2023.104622
![]() |
[119] | D. Xiao, L. Phee, J. Yuen, C. Chan, F. Liu, W. S. Ng, et al., Software design of transperineal prostate needle biopsy robot, in 2005 IEEE International Conference on Control Applications, IEEE, (2015), 13–18. https://doi.org/10.1109/CCA.2005.1507093 |
[120] |
M. Baumann, P. Mozer, V. Daanen, J. Troccaz, Prostate biopsy tracking with deformation estimation, Med. Image Anal., 16 (2012), 562–576. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2011.01.008 doi: 10.1016/j.media.2011.01.008
![]() |
[121] | M. Abayazid, N. Shahriari, S. Misra, Three-dimensional needle steering towards a localized target in a prostate phantom, in 2014 5th IEEE RAS/EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics (BioRob), IEEE, (2014), 7–12. https://doi.org/10.1109/BIOROB.2014.6913743 |
[122] | B. Busam, P. Ruhkamp, S. Virga, B. Lentes, J. Rackerseder, N. Navab, et al., Markerless inside-out tracking for 3d ultrasound compounding, in Simulation, Image Processing, and Ultrasound Systems for Assisted Diagnosis and Navigation, Springer, (2018), 56–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01045-4_7 |
[123] |
T. Peng, J. Zhao, Y. Gu, C. Wang, Y. Wu, X. Cheng, et al., H-ProMed: Ultrasound image segmentation based on the evolutionary neural network and an improved principal curve, Pattern Recognit., 131 (2022), 108890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2022.108890 doi: 10.1016/j.patcog.2022.108890
![]() |
[124] |
X. Xu, T. Sanford, B. Turkbey, S. Xu, B. J. Wood, P. Yan, Shadow-consistent semi-supervised learning for prostate ultrasound segmentation, IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging, 41 (2022), 1331–1345. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMI.2021.3139999 doi: 10.1109/TMI.2021.3139999
![]() |
[125] |
X. Wang, Z. Chang, Q. Zhang, C. Li, F. Miao, G. Gao, Prostate ultrasound image segmentation based on DSU-Net, Biomedicines, 11 (2023), 646. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines11030646 doi: 10.3390/biomedicines11030646
![]() |
[126] |
J. Bi, Y. Zhang, US/MRI guided robotic system for the interventional treatment of prostate, Int. J. Pattern Recognit Artif Intell., 34 (2020), 2059014. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218001420590144 doi: 10.1142/S0218001420590144
![]() |
[127] |
N. Altini, A. Brunetti, V. P. Napoletano, F. Girardi, E. Allegretti, S. M. Hussain, et al., A fusion biopsy framework for prostate cancer based on deformable superellipses and nnU-Net, Bioengineering, 9 (2022), 343. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering9080343 doi: 10.3390/bioengineering9080343
![]() |
[128] |
P. Kulkarni, S. Sikander, P. Biswas, S. Frawley, S. E. Song, Review of robotic needle guide systems for percutaneous intervention, Ann. Biomed. Eng., 47 (2019), 2489–2513. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-019-02319-9 doi: 10.1007/s10439-019-02319-9
![]() |
1. | Xi-Xin Wang, Yang Li, Mao-Cheng Liu, Ling-Bin Kong, Fabrication and electrochemical investigation of MWO4 (M = Co, Ni) nanoparticles as high-performance anode materials for lithium-ion batteries, 2018, 24, 0947-7047, 363, 10.1007/s11581-017-2200-0 | |
2. | Nirmala Kumari, V.K.V.P. Srirapu, Ajay Kumar, R.N. Singh, Investigation of mixed molybdates of cobalt and nickel for use as electrode materials in alkaline solution, 2020, 45, 03603199, 11040, 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.02.006 | |
3. | Nirmala Kumari, V.K.V.P. Srirapu, Ajay Kumar, R.N. Singh, Use of palladium nanoparticles dispersed on GNS - modified with 10 wt%CoMoO4 as efficient bifunctional electrocatalysts, 2019, 44, 03603199, 31312, 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.07.163 | |
4. | Nirmala Kumari, Ajay Kumar, V.K.V.P. Srirapu, R.N. Singh, Nitrogen-doped graphene supported Cu-Ag2.9 nanoparticles as efficient methanol tolerant cathode for oxygen reduction, 2018, 43, 03603199, 1781, 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.11.116 | |
5. | Hui Zhang, Rui-Juan Bai, Chun Lu, Jun Li, Ying-Ge Xu, Ling-Bin Kong, Mao-Cheng Liu, RGO-modified CoWO4 nanoparticles as new high-performance electrode materials for sodium-ion storage, 2019, 25, 0947-7047, 533, 10.1007/s11581-018-2791-0 | |
6. | Ajay Kumar, Nirmala Kumari, V.K.V.P. Srirapu, R.N. Singh, Palladium-ruthenium alloy nanoparticles dispersed on CoWO4-doped graphene for enhanced methanol electro-oxidation, 2018, 43, 03603199, 9677, 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.04.031 | |
7. | 嘉禄 黄, Research Progress in Controllable Synthesis of Palladium-Based Nanomaterials and Their Catalytic Ethanol Oxidation, 2021, 10, 2168-6122, 168, 10.12677/JAPC.2021.103016 | |
8. | Marwa Krichen, Nidhal Drissi, Karim Karoui, Fathi Jomni, Structural, optical and electrical properties of NiMO4 (M=W and Mo), 2024, 1298, 00222860, 137116, 10.1016/j.molstruc.2023.137116 | |
9. | J. Vigneshwaran, T. Prasankumar, M. N. M. Ansari, Hyung-Tae Lim, B. Yuliarto, Sujin P. Jose, Engineering the electrochemical performance of CoWO4 composites of MXene by transitional metal ion doping for high energy density supercapacitors, 2024, 0022-2461, 10.1007/s10853-024-09828-6 | |
10. | M. Jeyakanthan, E. Shinyjoy, V. Anbazhagan, Structural, optical and dielectric properties of Cr doped CoWO4 nanomaterial, 2025, 131, 0947-8396, 10.1007/s00339-024-08176-1 |
Samples | Pyridinic-N (at%)a | Pyrrolic- N (at%)a | Quaternary N (at%)a |
N-GNS | 28.9 (B.E. = 398.3 eV) | 53.7 (B.E. = 399.6 eV) | 17.3 (B.E. = 401.1 eV) |
40% CoWO4/NGNS | 35.6 (B.E. = 398.5 eV) | 43.0 (B.E. = 399.9 eV) | 21.0 (B.E. = 401.1 eV) |
aat% atomic percentage calculated from XPS result |
E/V | jk/mA·cm−2 | Slope (= 1/B)/mA−1·cm2·rpm1/2 | jd (= Bw1/2)/mA·cm−2 | n = no. of electrons |
0.850 | 0.74 | 4.88 | 8.19 | 2.1 |
0.839 | 0.87 | 5.48 | 7.29 | 2.4 |
0.827 | 1.09 | 7.30 | 5.48 | 3.2 |
0.817 | 1.27 | 7.35 | 5.44 | 3.3 |
0.810 | 1.38 | 7.49 | 5.34 | 3.4 |
0.801 | 1.63 | 8.33 | 4.80 | 3.7 |
0.790 | 1.85 | 8.40 | 4.76 | 3.8 |
E/V | jk/mA·cm−2 | Slope (= 1/B)/mA−1·cm2·rpm1/2 | jd (= Bw1/2)/mA·cm−2 | n = no. of electrons |
0.88 | 1.85 | 9.03 | 4.42 | 4.1 |
0.86 | 2.27 | 9.03 | 4.42 | 4.1 |
0.85 | 2.56 | 8.99 | 4.44 | 4.0 |
0.84 | 2.94 | 8.42 | 4.75 | 3.8 |
0.83 | 3.44 | 8.47 | 4.70 | 3.8 |
0.80 | 4.55 | 7.94 | 5.03 | 3.6 |
Samples | Pyridinic-N (at%)a | Pyrrolic- N (at%)a | Quaternary N (at%)a |
N-GNS | 28.9 (B.E. = 398.3 eV) | 53.7 (B.E. = 399.6 eV) | 17.3 (B.E. = 401.1 eV) |
40% CoWO4/NGNS | 35.6 (B.E. = 398.5 eV) | 43.0 (B.E. = 399.9 eV) | 21.0 (B.E. = 401.1 eV) |
aat% atomic percentage calculated from XPS result |
E/V | jk/mA·cm−2 | Slope (= 1/B)/mA−1·cm2·rpm1/2 | jd (= Bw1/2)/mA·cm−2 | n = no. of electrons |
0.850 | 0.74 | 4.88 | 8.19 | 2.1 |
0.839 | 0.87 | 5.48 | 7.29 | 2.4 |
0.827 | 1.09 | 7.30 | 5.48 | 3.2 |
0.817 | 1.27 | 7.35 | 5.44 | 3.3 |
0.810 | 1.38 | 7.49 | 5.34 | 3.4 |
0.801 | 1.63 | 8.33 | 4.80 | 3.7 |
0.790 | 1.85 | 8.40 | 4.76 | 3.8 |
E/V | jk/mA·cm−2 | Slope (= 1/B)/mA−1·cm2·rpm1/2 | jd (= Bw1/2)/mA·cm−2 | n = no. of electrons |
0.88 | 1.85 | 9.03 | 4.42 | 4.1 |
0.86 | 2.27 | 9.03 | 4.42 | 4.1 |
0.85 | 2.56 | 8.99 | 4.44 | 4.0 |
0.84 | 2.94 | 8.42 | 4.75 | 3.8 |
0.83 | 3.44 | 8.47 | 4.70 | 3.8 |
0.80 | 4.55 | 7.94 | 5.03 | 3.6 |