ArticleAPL bioengineering2026
MRI-guided endovascular robotics: A roadmap to MRI-native systems.
Article in APL bioengineering, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) offers potential advantages for endovascular intervention, including excellent soft-tissue contrast, multi-planar visualization, and the possibility of radiation-free guidance. Emerging robotic platforms, MRI-compatible catheter systems, and MRI-native navigation frameworks indicate that MRI-guided endovascular robotics is moving beyond isolated feasibility concepts. Yet routine MRI-guided robotic endovascular procedures remain rare. This gap is not explained by the absence of a single enabling technology, but by the interaction of tightly coupled constraints spanning instruments, imaging and feedback, navigation, and system integration. In endovascular settings, these constraints are amplified by the need for miniaturized, flexible, and steerable tools operating under limited and phase-dependent feedback. This perspective argues that progress in MRI-guided endovascular robotics requires moving beyond compatibility-driven adaptation toward MRI-robot co-design. First, the emerging landscape of representative robotic platforms, MRI-compatible and MRI-actuated catheter systems, and MRI-navigation-enabling technologies is outlined. The coupled constraints that continue to limit translation are then analyzed, showing why component-level solutions often remain fragile when integrated into full procedural workflows. Building on this framework, four research axes toward MRI-native endovascular robotic systems are proposed: MRI-native instruments, MRI-native feedback, navigation under bandwidth-limited imaging, and integrated systems built through workflow-aware validation and benchmarking. Across these axes, the discussion emphasizes the importance of miniaturized actuation, robot-aware MRI pipelines, feedback-efficient shared control, realistic simulation, benchmarking, and workflow-aware validation. MRI-guided endovascular robotics should therefore be understood as a systems integration challenge rather than a single-device problem. MRI-native robotic systems offer a concrete pathway toward safer, more precise, and radiation-free endovascular intervention.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.