Robotic Organ Retraction With Integrated Force Feedback

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing surgical retractors and space openers lack dexterity and provide no feedback on the force applied to tissue, leading to potential tissue damage during minimally invasive surgeries.

Innovation Solution

Integration of compliant retractor tips, articulating joints, and integrated force sensors to enable controlled and automated organ retraction, minimizing force applied to tissue.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of operation

If manually manipulated rigid retractors are used, then organ retraction and space opening can be achieved, but control over applied force is difficult and tissue damage may occur

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecontrol over applied forceVSAvoidtissue damage

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of operationVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

Force sensors are integrated into the retractor device to provide real-time feedback on the force being applied to the organ. This feedback loop enables the control system to adjust actuator commands dynamically, ensuring force remains within safe thresholds and preventing tissue damage while maintaining effective retraction.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces manual mechanical manipulation with an automated robotic system that uses actuators and control algorithms. This substitution provides precise control over retraction forces, eliminating the variability and lack of control inherent in manual operation of rigid retractors.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

2Adaptability or versatility

If rigid retractors are used, then structural strength is maintained, but dexterity and adaptability to tissue contours are limited

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedexterity and adaptability to tissue contoursVSAvoidstructural strength

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSStrength

Solution Approach 1:

The retractor device is divided into multiple segments including articulating joints and modular components. This segmentation allows each segment to move and adapt independently to tissue contours while maintaining overall structural integrity through controlled connections between segments.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent incorporates articulating joints that enable dynamic adjustment of the retractor's configuration. These joints allow the device to adapt its shape and orientation in real-time to match tissue contours and surgical requirements, providing dexterity while maintaining strength through controlled mechanical design.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

3Reliability

If automated retraction is implemented with force sensors, then tissue damage is minimized, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveprevention of tissue damageVSAvoiddevice complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The retractor device integrates multiple functions into a single system: mechanical retraction capability, force sensing, automated control, and articulation. This multi-functionality reduces the need for separate devices and simplifies the overall surgical workflow while maintaining tissue safety through integrated force monitoring and control.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Data Source

PatentUS12426867B2Systems and methods for organ retraction and space opening

Publication Date: 2025.09.30 MICROLINE SURGICAL INC

AI summary

Robotic organ retraction systems, devices (200), and methods. Organ retraction devices (200) may include compliant retractor tips, articulating joints (702), integrated force sensors (408, 410), and automatic retraction capability to enable safe and efficient organ retraction.