Preprint
Review

This version is not peer-reviewed.

Autonomous Robotic Surgery Guided by Images in the Context of Therapies Managed by Intelligent Digital Technologies

Submitted:

30 January 2026

Posted:

02 February 2026

You are already at the latest version

Abstract

This narrative review aims to highlight and analyze the supervision of precision robotic surgical interventions. These are autonomous, closed-loop procedures, assisted by image and managed by intelligent digital tools. These administered procedures are designed to be safe and reliable, adhering to the principles of minimal invasiveness, precise positioning, and non-toxicity. Thus, a precision intervention uses non-ionizing imaging-assisted robotics, controlled by a precise positioning device, forming an autonomous procedure augmented by artificial intelligence tools and supervised by digital twins. This intelligent digital management allows staff to plan, train, predict, and execute interventions under human supervision. Patient safety and staff efficiency are linked to non-ionizing imaging, minimal invasiveness through image guidance, and strict delimitation of the intervention zone through precise positioning. This contribution includes therapeutic and surgical interventions, imaging strategies integrating diagnostic and assistance functions, intelligent digital tools including digital twins and artificial intelligence, image-guided procedures including autonomous and precision robotic surgical interventions increased by machine learning, as well as augmented healthcare monitoring. All topics addressed in this analysis are supported by examples from the literature.

Keywords: 
;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  
Subject: 
Engineering  -   Bioengineering

1. Introduction

Throughout human history, well-being, including safety, healthcare, and comfort, has been a constant concern. Health was a major issue, with protocols successively involving external observation, diagnosis, assisting and drug treatments, and, as a last resort, internal interventions. All these medical tasks relied on the natural senses—sight, touch, and hearing—assisted by artificial instruments that were refined over time. Medications were administered through external orifices of the body or through invasive skin incisions, and surgical procedures were performed through large, invasive incisions. These invasive techniques were necessary to access, see, and operate properly, but they also presented a certain risk in maintaining perfect hygiene during the operation and in ensuring proper suturing.
The aforementioned medical therapeutics and open surgical interventions are still performed in several totally appropriate situations, but with considerably improved hygiene conditions and sophisticated instruments that assist natural human senses.
It is certainly commendable that all healthcare procedures be performed reliably and safely, which implies a high level of precision, non-toxic conditions, and a non-invasive or minimally invasive approach [1]. These characteristics are linked to multidisciplinary technology. Thanks to recent technological advances in the fields of intelligent digital tools, smart materials, and high-performance imaging strategies, medical treatments and interventions can undergo significant innovations. Indeed, observation, diagnosis, assistance, and drug treatments can be performed using smart wearable detection [2] and assistance devices [3,4,5], as well as imaging scanners. Similarly, surgical interventions and drug administration can utilize computer-assisted or image-guided robotic techniques, supervised by intelligent digital tools [6].
In the field of imaging, different techniques, based on distinct physical principles, allow for the design of different types of scanners, each adapted to a specific use. These different types of scanners may present compatibility problems related to their operating principle. They can be used for diagnosis, learning, and disease classification [7,8], as well as to assist in interventions [1,6]. In the last case, given the interventional duration, only scanners using non-ionizing technologies are permitted for obvious safety reasons [6].
Among the promising and effective digital tools recently developed, three main technologies stand out: digital twins (DTs), artificial intelligence (AI), and extended reality (XR). A DT is a dynamic and faithful virtual replica of a real-world object [9,10,11,12]. AI, on the other hand, functions like a reasoning machine, processing enormous amounts of data to extract knowledge, predict future situations, and systematize complex decisions [13]. It includes specialized branches such as machine learning (ML), deep learning (DL), robotics, and much more [14,15,16,17]. XR (including virtual, augmented and mixed realities: VR, AR and MR) facilitates immersion in human interaction [18,19,20]. These tools can be used individually or in combination, paving the way for a new era of smart and adaptive procedures. For example, in the medical field, staff can prepare for, train and/or practice an AI-augmented complex autonomous procedure via DT, generating new data that continuously enhances the procedure.
As abovementioned surgical and embedded drug administration interventions can utilize different interventional procedures. These can use open, laparoscopic, robotized laparoscopic, computer-assisted or image-assisted robotic procedures. For high level of positioning precision and minimally invasive approach, the robotized procedures seem more reliable. In addition, the image-guided strategy that uses instantaneous imaging aiding in immediate positioning performs matchless. The resulting autonomous image-assisted robotic procedure reflects high precision intervention [6]. The integration of digital tools mentioned earlier enhance the performance of such precision interventions.
Medical observation, assistance and interventions are related to detecting sensors and robotic actuations. The performance of sensors and actuators is related to their technology and material. Precision therapeutics need generally smart material sensing and actuating devices as piezoelectric [21].
Thanks to the highlights mentioned above, various healthcare problems can be monitored by DTs applied to complex autonomous procedures, enhanced by AI, ML and/or XR, thereby improving overall patient well-being and strengthening staff skills. For example, in the context of monitoring precision interventions and wearable assistance and detection strategies [22].
This contribution aims to analyze and highlight the supervision of safe and reliable robotic surgical interventions involving autonomous image-assisted procedures associated to intelligent digital tools. This narrative review specifically examines:
  • Medical therapeutics and surgical interventions including wearable sensing and assistive tools and robotic interventional procedures.
  • Imaging strategies including diagnostic functions, assistive duties as well as security and compatibility issues.
  • Smart digital tools comprising artificial intelligence implements and digital twins’ mechanisms.
  • Image-assisted procedures involving autonomous and precision robotic surgical interventions, the integration of AI and ML practices, and robotic actuation.
  • Extended monitoring in healthcare involvements and related magnitudes for staff supplemented tasks and patient well-being enhancement as well as AI and XR in the managing of MRI-guided autonomous interventions.
  • Supplementing discussion and conclusions.
For more clearness on the expressions connection related to the next Section 2, Section 3, Section 4, Section 5 and Section 6 of the main text, please refer to Figure 1.

2. Therapeutics and Surgical Interventions

As mentioned previously, in current medicine, observation for diagnostic purposes, medical assistance, and surgical interventions are essential tasks of healthcare. These tasks rely on wearable detection and supporting devices, as well as robotic interventional procedures. These tools and procedures will be highlighted and analyzed in this section.

2.1. Wearable Sensing and Assistive Tools

Wearable treatment mechanisms are healthcare tissue contiguous or incorporated, performing sensing or assistive tasks. They can achieve compliant or directed utilities employed in skins or tissues and can perform autonomous or remotely controlled. Generally, they operate continuously in real-time permitting incessant supervision of health data allowing patients to accomplish their quotidian reaching while staying supervised.
Sensing duties can employ skin pressure non-invasive sensors or embedded minimally-invasive biosensors or antennas. Under these conditions, sensing tasks, combined with smart materials and AI, enable rapid and accurate health detections and consistent personalized therapies [2]. For portable pressure sensors using smart materials such as piezoelectric materials, which offer high sensitivity and linear response, different reliability requirements can be met. For instance, accurate wrist pulse measure [23], Parkinson’s shake assessment [24] and generally in healthcare detections [25,26,27], diagnostics [28,29], supervising [30,31,32] and managing [33,34]. In the case of biosensors or antennas different detections, monitoring and assessments could be found in [35,36,37,38,39].
Wearable assistive tools are used for different body organs stimulation or supporting. Generally they use robotic procedures involving either self-actuated mini-robots [40,41,42,43,44,45] or external joint actuated [46,47,48,49], (this aspect will be detailed in Section 5.4). Different assistive tasks could be found for example in, assisting sensorimotor deficits [3,4,5], heart stimulation tools [50], implanted drug release [51], implanted supervision of spinal cord [52] and regulated blood flow [53].

2.2. Robotic Interventional Procedures

The minimally invasive approach mentioned previously has updated traditional open surgery through laparoscopy [54,55]. This technique uses small incisions to insert miniature camera and instrument armed with a light source, thus providing better visualization. The laparoscopic procedure is connected to reduced postoperative pain and faster healing, as well as improved incision aesthetics and a abridged risk of complications, thereby shortening hospital stays [56,57]. Nevertheless, such procedure engaging lengthened tools in addition to 2-D visualizing displays, may originate staff operative ergonomic hazards [54,58] and possible enlarged postoperative nuisance [59]. A robotized brand of such procedure can temper such hazards via different subsidiary tasks [60]. Consequently, only a fully robotized minimally invasive procedure can avoid all the mentioned limitations.
Robotic surgery uses processed medical images, enabling computer control to position, move, and operate the interventional instrument. It offers improved surgical control and enhanced ergonomics for staff through 3-D vision, greater freedom of movement thanks to robotics, and a less invasive procedure [61,62,63]. It is characterized by dynamic interactions between machines, increased precision, and autonomous operation [64,65,66] in addition to staff supervision [67,68,69].
As stated earlier, a reliable autonomous intervention involving a smart substitute of 3-D visual skill, can be valuably reached through a coherent image-guided robotic procedure [70]. Indeed, this procedure looks to be a clear advantage compared to other minimally invasive procedures, while also allowing for a significant improvement in the surgeon’s skills and greater ease throughout the procedure [1,6,71,72]. In addition, such assisted procedures are well adapted to intricate surgeries [73,74,75,76] or restricted drug releases [77,78,79], both impose activities in a constrained zone, to safeguard healthy tissues accosting the troubled area.
In conclusion, robotic surgery eliminates the invasive nature of open surgery and improves the visualization, precision, and ergonomics of laparoscopy. The image-assisted robotic compared to robotic (computer-assisted) surgery, offers the significant advantage of reliable real-time imaging tool that allow for immediate positioning.

3. Imaging Strategies

Current healthcare needs require advanced imaging technologies that allow for reliable and safe observation of the inside of the skin. These technologies are characterized by high resolution, speed, ease of use, non-invasiveness, and low cost. Each imaging technique is associated with a specific physical domain, giving it particular properties. Therefore, the use of an imaging system has advantages and limitations depending on the application and the tissue being imaged. Medical imaging applications primarily involve diagnosis, treatment using images [7,8], and interventional guidance [1,6]. The body parts imaged include soft tissue organs, bones, blood vessels, cavities, and their mixtures.
The main categories of imaging are: radiography (X-ray), computed tomography (CT), nuclear medicine imaging, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and ultrasound. The first three are ionizing, while the latter two are non-ionizing. These five categories can be used for short-term specific applications for diagnostic purposes, while only the two non-ionizing techniques can be used for longer periods like interventional assistance, these last techniques will be further deliberated in Section 5.1.

4. Smart Digital Tools

In the context of monitoring autonomous and precision robotic procedures involving complex and interdependent components, two types of digital tools are particularly well-suited to managing these complexities: DT [9,10,11,12] and AI [13,14,15,16,17]. DT helps reduce uncertainties and external risks within complex systems [9]. AI, on the other hand, enables automated and autonomous robotic decision-making through data exploitation, while its dedicated branch, Machine Learning (ML), allows for data analysis within these autonomous procedures. Indeed, AI leverages data to arrive at informed decisions, while ML processes data to learn and enrich it.

4.1. Artificial Intelligence Tools

AI is principally a vast arrangement of implements that enable computers to function smartly, simulating human intelligence and operating automatically, for example, in autonomous robotic procedures [16]. It exploits data to reach well-informed decisions and can come to be further operational as it collects more data [14,15]. ML is a committed stem within the wide field of AI. Its main goal is to construct and polish up algorithms that turn into more reliable and skillful as they act together with data during the course of time. It provides computers to analyze data, and fashion learnt decisions or predictions, all devoid of demanding specific programming for such duties [80]. It explicitly targets to reduce human interference as far as possible, systematizing the learning practice from data. In numerous recent appliances, AI and ML are expended together to fully leverage the potential of each [81]. Numerous implications of AI tools in general in medical applications could be found for example in hospital management [15], medical image classification [82], hand surgery [83], diagnostics [84], image analysis [85], monitoring and clinical trials [86], and ophthalmology [87,88,89].

4.2. Digital Twins

As mentioned previously, DT helps reduce uncertainties and external risks within complex systems. A DT comprises two matched components: a physical component and its virtual replica, along with near-instantaneous bidirectional information exchange between them. This matched pair enables intrinsic self-regulation, the physical component transmits processed sensor information to the virtual component, while the latter communicates control instructions to the physical component. This adjustment assistance enables the aforementioned reductions in the control of the complex system. Regarding the precise functioning of the matching within the DT components, the exchanged data from the physical system is adjusted using external information, such as data from the Internet of Things (IoT), as well as the system’s learned operating history. The adjusted result, after training through data analysis, is then transmitted to the virtual component. The inherent complexity of the interaction between the components of the physical system is reflected in its virtual replica by a complex coupled model. Since DT matching is supposed to be swift, this speed is incompatible with the computation time of the coupled model. Therefore, such an inclusive model must be compacted to reduce computation time while maintaining a realistic representation of the physical system.
Related to health applications, the DT tool has been increasingly initiated in the medical domain. For example, different assessments involving therapeutics, managements and supervision related to nursing, healthcare and sustained disturbs could be found in [11,90,91,92,93,94]. DT supervision is commonly practiced in personalized healthcare, which involves therapeutics or interventional procedures. In addition, DT can be used in staff training, task planning, and predictions through the engagement of physical and virtual phantoms as well as in actual interventions with autonomous procedures with staff management [95,96,97,98].

5. Image-Assisted Interventional Procedures

As mentioned above a secure, self-sufficient minimally invasive intervention containing accurate positioning and visual ability can be beneficially attained by consistent robotic procedure helped by imaging scanners. Such system can be augmented through the use of smart digital tools for its supervision and smart material devices for actuation necessary for the procedure functioning.

5.1. Autonomous and Precision Robotic Surgical Interventions

The safety personifying an image-assisted robotic intervention is connected to two influences related to the positioning exactness and the involved imaging technology used for a relatively important interventional duration. Actually, the precision of positioning ensures a constricted deed in the concerned tissue zone and can be realized via a dedicated actuation tool, while only non-ionizing imaging technology can be practiced according to the imaging interventional duration. It is worth noting that the body concerned tissue is placed interior the scanner scaffold. Therefore, MRI and ultrasound scanners are usually employed in such conditions [73,74,75,76]. Moreover, MRI presents a superior discriminating ability between tumors and healthful tissues in tumor removal surgeries [99,100,101,102] and in drug release [1,6]. Furthermore, MRI is universally working in all tissues, unlike ultrasound that is limited to tissues deprived of bone or air. On the other hand, MRI structures is vulnerable to electromagnetic interference (EMI) and hence robotic involvements including interventional tools employed in image-guided procedures should be insusceptible to EMI.
From the above analysis, the association of the scanner, image processed digital control, the concerned tissue zone surrounded by healthy tissues, the interventional instrument, and the robotic actuation, all performed in a closed-loop procedure as exhibited in Figure 2.

5.2. Integration of AI and ML Practices

Generally, as mentioned before, AI and big data are essential for creating real-time perceptions that allow decision-making in complex processes [103,104,105,106]. Combining large data outflows and AI algorithms offers significant potential for extracting exploitable information with exceptional speed and accuracy.
AI can be used for complex decision-making, particularly in the context of autonomous precision robotic surgical procedures [13,14,15,16,17]. In such cases, the procedure must be performed autonomously within the target area, with high precision, and make decisions in a fraction of a second to prevent any incidents. AI, through a set of rules, can manage multiple parameters such as positioning, speed, and adaptive control, thus enabling complex, real-time decision-making. AI therefore allows autonomous precision robotic procedures to be performed securely and skillfully, thereby reducing the risk of human error.
ML applied to data-driven predictions enables the use of predictive analytics on healthcare data for precise and autonomous robotic interventions [82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89]. This allows for the prediction of disease progression and patient health status, thereby guiding the personalization of procedures and improving care. ML algorithms can manage and examine vast datasets, including patient records, lab results, scan images, and more, to identify trends and risk factors associated with various health conditions. Such algorithms unceasingly learn and upgrade their forecasts as further information grow to be accessible, permitting individualized and proactive therapeutic methodologies. Thus, the employment of ML in healthcare allows timely detection of menaced patients and forecasting of disorder eruptions, promoting enhanced patient results, further reliable healthcare and decreased expenses.

5.3. Tailored Actuation Technologies

The various robotic interventions described require actuators for instrument movement and positioning. Several actuation technologies are available, the most common being pneumatic, hydraulic, electromagnetic, and smart technologies, which operate according to their method of converting energy into movement, for example, piezoelectric, magnetostrictive, electroactive polymer, shape memory alloy, and photomechanical. These technologies have specific characteristics and requirements related to precision, potency, speed, environmental conditions, and so on. Therefore, the robotic procedure in question will employ the most suitable actuator based on motion resolution, positioning accuracy, response time, rigidity, strength, structural complexity, insensitivity to EMI, dimensions, and other factors.
In light of the above and following the analysis of the autonomous robotic surgical procedure presented in Section 5.1 (an MRI-assisted robotic procedure), piezoelectric technology appears to be a preferred solution for such robotic medical interventions [21]. Indeed, this technology offers exceptional resolution at the nanoscale (compared to other smart technologies), rapid responsiveness (compared to pneumatic and hydraulic technologies), and invulnerability to EMI needed by the use of MRI (compared to electromagnetic technology), thus surpassing other common or smart technologies. The last analysis is exemplified in Figure 3.

5.4. Actuated Robots and Self-Actuated Miniature Robots

Intervention or assistance robots actuated by piezoelectric technology [21] fall into two categories, depending on the therapeutic needs: self-actuated miniature structures using combined piezoelectric materials that allow them to move autonomously, and robotic arms actuated by external tools placed in their joints. The miniature robot category is linked to traveling waves (TWs) on thin beam or plate structures, involving precise and limited transfers of small loads on the surface (see Figure 4) or within tissues [40,41,42,43] or of fluids in conduits (see Figure 5), such as micro pumps [44,45]. These micro robots are commonly used for precision tasks requiring smooth and repetitive transfers, corresponding to assistance tasks. The category of robotic arms (see Figure 6) uses step-by-step and/or repetitive movement strategies, allowing for wider strokes and greater freedom of movement [46], particularly thanks to stepper [47,48] and ultrasonic [49] actuators, which are particularly suited to medical interventions.

6. Augmented Monitoring in Healthcare Involvements

Supervising precision robotic interventions, through closed-loop MRI-assisted procedures, using AI-enhanced DT technology and XR digital tools, enables reliable and safe interventions, ensuring patient well-being and staff success. Beyond personalized intervention monitoring, these digital tools facilitate various specific tasks such as intervention scheduling, medical team training, therapeutic research, education, and more. These interventions ensure patient safety by adhering to the principles of minimally invasive surgery, avoiding toxicity, and preserving healthy tissue. Specifically, the invasiveness is controlled by imaging, the use of non-ionizing scanners guarantees the absence of toxicity, and precise positioning allows for accurate delineation of the intervention area [1,6]. These interventions include surgery and drug administration.

6.1. Enhancement of Staff Skills

Smart digital administration permits medical team to schedule, train, forecast, and perform interventions assisted by human control. Actually, DT supervised interventions request preparation to fine-tune and confirm the concerned deeds. These can be attained through the use of material phantoms and their digital replicas both included in the DT implement. Such pre-duties comprise personalized data of both patient and the intended intervention [107], conforming adjusting of interventional questions, such as imaging adjustments and compatibility [108], robotic concerns, etc. In addition, such specific preparation permits medical team to arbitrate options and be aware of potential evaluation mistakes [109,110]. Other smart digital tools included in medical applications could be found in different domains such as cognitive control training [111], advancing surgical training [112], learning [113,114], surgery [115], posture training and rehabilitation [116,117], and ethics [118].

6.2. Enhancement of Healthcare

Different clinical and healthcare improvements are associated to AI digital tools, such as patient security and clinical decision-making [119], the enhancement of efficacy, the decrease of expenses and the advancement of modernization in medical research [120], the forecast of reaction to anti-angiogenic treatment in renal cancer clinical trials [121], the conversion of healthcare supply through AI boards [122] and novel DTs of patients or their organs based on AI based on large historical datasets [123]. In addition, DTs incorporating real-time data with IoT arrangement, can allow dynamic patient modeling, prognostic diagnostics, and optimization of medical tool execution [124] and DT based on the framework for continuously modeling the tool-tissue interaction and monitoring the deformation and strain of the tissue surface [125]. Also, advances in continuous monitoring and the barriers to their translation that improves disease-risk assessment, tracks disease progression and enhances overall health management [126]. Concerning robotic-assisted surgeries, remote procedures permit a potential solution to surgeon shortage and regional disparities in care [127] and integrating multi-modal robot sensing capabilities allow to adapt to the dynamic requirements of complex surgical scenarios [128]. Relating to AI-assisted remote healthcare facilitating a swing from hospital-centered to decentralized, patient-centric mode [129,130] and smart wearable systems for health monitoring [131].

6.3. DT, AI and XR in the Managing of MRI-Guided Interventions

As mentioned previously, for monitoring complex and autonomous robotic medical procedures, three types of digital tools are complementary: DT [9,10,11,12], AI [13,14,15,16,17], and XR [18,19,20]. DT, in addition to digital monitoring, helps reduce uncertainties and external risks within complex systems [9]. AI, including ML [80,81], can play effective roles [82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89] in robotic decision-making in autonomous procedures through the use of data (AI) and in more reliable and skillful procedure via the analysis of that data (ML). XR facilitates immersion in human interaction during digital monitoring. The complementary roles of DT, AI and XR are illustrated in Figure 7.
The monitoring of MRI-guided autonomous intervention assisted by AI via DT augmented by XR is illustrated in Figure 8.

7. Discussion

In the preceding sections, the supervision of precision robotic surgical interventions managed by intelligent digital tools in the general context of observation, diagnosis, assistance and interventions, all supported by digital skill, deserves to be addressed from different angles.

7.1. Relation between Digital Skills and Innovations

Digital technologies have generally given rise to innovations that have fostered effective development based on understanding [132,133]. In the case of medical observation, diagnosis, assistance and interventions, digital skills have as well permitted significant innovations. Regarding disruptive digital innovations in the health sector, the combined interest in digital transformation and healthcare in recent years, unexpectedly intensified by the COVID-19 pandemic, has generated a plethora of publications on the subject. This has led to different studies on the analysis and evaluation of existing research on disruptive digital innovations in in healthcare. These studies offer many interesting theoretical and practical implications that can be used to facilitate the digitalization of healthcare [134,135,136,137]. These innovations include improving staff skills and healthcare, as well as the role of DT, AI and XR in managing autonomous MRI-guided interventions, discussed in Section 6.

7.2. Coordinated Strategies for Digital Health Creation

Within the framework of coordinated strategies for creating digital health solutions, concerns regarding staff, designers and patients generally focus on: more patient-centered design strategies, requirements for good practices in inclusive design, integration of approved applications into clinical workflows, transparency and sustainability [138,139,140]. Moreover, multifunctional and smart tools incorporating AI, intelligent materials and energy reliable strategies, can enable real-time detection [141]. Furthermore, the development of standardized testing protocols to assess the durability, biocompatibility, and stability of healthcare can enable clinically confirmed diagnoses, thereby contributing to the modernization of healthcare practices [142]. The importance of machine learning techniques in the diagnosis of cervical cancer is also recognized [143].

7.3. Validation Investigations and Path to Clinical Implementations

In the present paper a transitional pathway from investigations to clinical implementation examples seem necessary. In addition to the relation between digital skills and innovations as well as coordinated strategies for digital health creation discussed above, there are many recent published works related to clinical validations and implementations. For example, regarding clinical applications related to AI [144,145,146], concerning brain–computer interfaces and stimulation [147,148,149], relating to digital skills-enhanced wearables [150,151,152,153,154,155], and implanted devices concerns [156,157,158]. Furthermore, one can find different specific clinical concerns, for example historical diagnostics [159], federated learning for remote patient monitoring [160], environmental therapy [161], spinal cord injury [162] and digital hardware cost [163].

7.4. Autonomous Procedure Complexity Admin and Model Reduction in DT

In the paper above analysis the interventional autonomous procedure intrinsic complexity results from its interdependent involved phenomena interaction. Such complexity is significantly stressed by the living tissues of the body part affected by the intervention. A typical example of such tissues are those of ocular system, which involve heat transfer and fluid dynamics occurrences necessary for eye performing [164]. The mathematical representation of interdependent phenomena in the autonomous procedure can be achieved by coupling the equations of the corresponding phenomena. The more complex the procedure, the more complex the coupled solution will be. The DT treatment of complexity is performed via the matching of the real procedure and its virtual replica that include the coupled complete model. Therefore, the procedure DT virtual replica would include a bio-physical part involving a numerical model associated with interface and boundary conditions. As mentioned in the DT supervising process it is needed to employ reduced or surrogate model [165,166,167]. Actually, the speed of matching in the DT prevents the use of a fully coupled model, which nevertheless accurately represents real-world behavior. In this case, it is necessary to perform a sensitivity analysis of the model, pursued by a model reduction strategy to decrease computation time although preserving the physical picture of the problem and retaining only the characteristics essential for a correct physical aspect.

7.5. Medical Devices Vulnerability to EMI

Nowadays, artificial devices exerting electromagnetic fields (EMFs) are commonly daily used for large societal assistances. Nevertheless, such devices reflect intrinsic emissions, which can produce different unsolicited side effects on near objects. Actually, such exposures induce fields in the object relying on the exposure strength and frequency and exposed object geometrical and material features. Generally, the exposed objects comprise living tissues, wearable devices, therapeutic and imaging tools, and other electronic appliances. In consequence, medically, the emitted EMFs induced fields can disturb right away living tissues in general (human, animals, plants, etc.) and peripherally observation and assistance wearable tools as well as devices implicated in medical interventions such as robots and imaging devices [168].
Concerning living tissues, the induced fields relative to EMF exposure crop biological effects (BEs) exemplified by the specific absorption rate (SAR), field frequency and exposure interval. These BEs generally reveal thermal outcomes, which could be dangerous for disproportionate SARs and durations [168,169].
Regarding observation and assistance wearable tools and interventional robots and imaging devices, they are supposed to present, as mentioned earlier, a strict immunity to EMI. Such invulnerability comprises defense anti external exposure, proscription of internal EMF-sensitive substances and / or shielding. Indeed, EMF exposure can perturb a targets internal field or its functioning due to an internal EMF-sensitive matter, like the cases respectively of MRI scanners or wearable tools. The level of EMI immunity of wearable and interventional devices quantifies their operational compatibility under EMF exposure. Such compatibility can be certified by suitable design or shielding, which can be controlled via electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) analysis using experimental or computational methodologies [170,171].

7.6. Future Research Perspectives

This section is dedicated to potential future perspectives related to topics investigated in this paper. In the management of surgical interventions the physical and digital representations of dynamic mechanical behavior of living tissues need more investigations [172,173]. In smart digital environment integrating smart materials and smart digital tools, biosecurity suggest the investigation of compatible materials [174] as well as healthcare patient safety related to the use of digital technology, such as data transfer [175]. Smart digital monitoring using digital tools (DT, AI, and/or XR) can be extended to medical utilities beyond interventions as research explorations, design, development, healthcare management, biological approaches, and medical diagnostics [176,177,178,179,180]. As well, future of rehabilitation can use AI and ML optimization in training and real-time feedback [162].

8. Conclusions

The present contribution analyzed and highlighted the supervision of robotic surgical interventions through autonomous procedures assisted by image and augmented by AI and managed by DT. Such intelligent digital management allows staff to plan, train, predict, and execute interventions autonomous or under human supervision assisted by XR. Patient safety and staff efficiency are linked to non-ionizing imaging, minimal invasiveness through image guidance, and strict delimitation of the intervention zone through precise positioning.
Future investigations can involve the dynamic mechanical behavior of living tissues, biosecurity, healthcare patient safety related to the use of digital technology, extension of digital monitoring to medical utilities beyond interventions as research explorations, and rehabilitation use of AI and ML.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created.

Acknowledgments

The authors have reviewed and edited the output and take full responsibility for the content of this publication.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Razek, A. Image-Guided Surgical and Pharmacotherapeutic Routines as Part of Diligent Medical Treatment. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 13039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Chen, S; Fan, S; Qiao, Z; Wu, Z; Lin, B; Li, Z; Riegler, MA; Wong, MYH; Opheim, A; Korostynska, O; Nielsen, KM; Glott, T; Martinsen, ACT; Telle-Hansen, VH; Lim, CT. Transforming Healthcare: Intelligent Wearable Sensors Empowered by Smart Materials and Artificial Intelligence. Adv Mater. 2025, 37(21), e2500412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Martinez-Hernandez, U.; Metcalfe, B.; Assaf, T.; Jabban, L.; Male, J.; Zhang, D. Wearable Assistive Robotics: A Perspective on Current Challenges and Future Trends. Sensors 2021, 21, 6751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Li, Y; Luo, S; Luo, R; Liu, H. A novel real-time assistive hip-wearable exoskeleton robot based on motion prediction for lower extremity rehabilitation in subacute stroke: a single-blinded, randomized controlled trial. BMC Neurol. 2025, 25(1), 399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Winterbottom, L; Chen, A; Mendonca, R; Nilsen, DM; Ciocarlie, M; Stein, J. Clinician perceptions of a novel wearable robotic hand orthosis for post-stroke hemiparesis. Disabil Rehabil. 2025, 47(6), 1577–1586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Razek, A. From Open, Laparoscopic, or Computerized Surgical Interventions to the Prospects of Image-Guided Involvement. Appl. Sci. 2025, 15, 4826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Yang, X.; Duan, A.; Jiang, Z.; Li, X.; Wang, C.; Wang, J.; Zhou, J. Segmentation and Classification of Lung Cancer Images Using Deep Learning. Appl. Sci. 2026, 16, 628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Franco, L; Toma, M. Validation strategies for automated MRI-based classification of Alzheimer’s disease using deep feature extraction and machine learning. Artificial Intelligence in Health 2025, 025360073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Grieves, M; Vickers, J. Digital twin: Mitigating unpredictable, undesirable emergent behavior in complex systems. In Trans-disciplinary Perspectives on Complex Systems; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 85–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Tao, F; Sui, F; Liu, A; Qi, Q; Zhang, M; Song, B; Guo, Z; Lu, SCY; Nee, AYC. Digital twin-driven product design framework. Int J Prod Res. 2019, 57, 3935–3953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Sun, T; He, X; Li, Z. Digital twin in healthcare: Recent updates and challenges. Digit Health 2023, 9, 20552076221149651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Asciak, L; Kyeremeh, J; Luo, X; Kazakidi, A; Connolly, P; Picard, F; O’Neill, K; Tsaftaris, SA; Stewart, GD; Shu, W. Digital twin assisted surgery, concept, opportunities, and challenges. NPJ Digit Med. 2025, 8(1), 32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Wah, JNK. The rise of robotics and AI-assisted surgery in modern healthcare. J Robot Surg. 2025, 19(1), 311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Karalis, V.D. The Integration of Artificial Intelligence into Clinical Practice. Appl. Biosci. 2024, 3, 14–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Nasef, D; Nasef, D; Sawiris, V; Weinstein, B; Garcia, J; Toma, M. Integrating artificial intelligence in clinical practice, hospital management, and health policy: literature review. J Hosp Manag Health Policy 2025, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Boeken, T; Lim, HD; Cohen, EI. The Role and Future of Artificial Intelligence in Robotic Image-Guided Interventions. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol. 2024, 27(4), 101001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Han, F; Huang, X; Wang, X; Chen, YF; Lu, C; Li, S; Lu, L; Zhang, DW. Artificial Intelligence in Orthopedic Surgery: Current Applications, Challenges, and Future Directions. MedComm (2020) 2025, 6(7), e70260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Oyama, S; Iwase, H; Yoneda, H; Yokota, H; Hirata, H; Yamamoto, M. Insights and trends review: Use of extended reality (xR) in hand surgery. J Hand Surg Eur Vol. 2025(50(6)), 762–770. [CrossRef]
  19. Angrisani, L.; D’Arco, M.; De Benedetto, E.; Duraccio, L.; Lo Regio, F.; Sansone, M.; Tedesco, A. Performance Measurement of Gesture-Based Human–Machine Interfaces Within eXtended Reality Head-Mounted Displays. Sensors 2025, 25, 2831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Guerra-Armas, J.; Roldán-Ruiz, A.; Flores-Cortes, M.; Harvie, D.S. Harnessing Extended Reality for Neurocognitive Training in Chronic Pain: State of the Art, Opportunities, and Future Directions. Healthcare 2025, 13, 1338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Razek, A.; Bernard, Y. Potential of Piezoelectric Actuation and Sensing in High Reliability Precision Mechanisms and Their Applications in Medical Therapeutics. Actuators 2025, 14, 528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Razek, A.; Pichon, L. Smart Digital Environments for Monitoring Precision Medical Interventions and Wearable Observation and Assistance. Technologies 2026, 14, 40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Gao, T; Qiu, X; Xu, P; Hu, Z; Yan, J; Xiang, Y; Xuan, FZ. Piezoelectret-based dual-mode flexible pressure sensor for accurate wrist pulse signal acquisition in health monitoring. Measurement 2025, 242, 116283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Xie, Q; Han, L; Liu, J; Zhang, W; Zhao, L; Liu, Y; Chen, Y; Li, Y; Zhou, Q; Dong, Y; Wang, X. Kirigami-Inspired Stretchable Piezoelectret Sensor for Analysis and Assessment of Parkinson’s Tremor. Advanced Healthcare Materials 2025, 14(1), 2402010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Liu, E.; Cai, Z.; Ye, Y.; Zhou, M.; Liao, H.; Yi, Y. An Overview of Flexible Sensors: Development, Application, and Challenges. Sensors 2023, 23, 817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Devi, D.H.; Duraisamy, K.; Armghan, A.; Alsharari, M.; Aliqab, K.; Sorathiya, V.; Das, S.; Rashid, N. 5G Technology in Healthcare and Wearable Devices: A Review. Sensors 2023, 23, 2519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Mukhopadhyay, S.C.; Suryadevara, N.K.; Nag, A. Wearable Sensors for Healthcare: Fabrication to Application. Sensors 2022, 22, 5137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Chakrabarti, S.; Biswas, N.; Jones, L.D.; Kesari, S.; Ashili, S. Smart Consumer Wearables as Digital Diagnostic Tools: A Review. Diagnostics 2022, 12, 2110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Escobar-Linero, E.; Muñoz-Saavedra, L.; Luna-Perejón, F.; Sevillano, J.L.; Domínguez-Morales, M. Wearable Health Devices for Diagnosis Support: Evolution and Future Tendencies. Sensors 2023, 23, 1678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Pantelopoulos, A.; Bourbakis, N.G. A survey on wearable sensor-based systems for health monitoring and prognosis. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man. Cybern. Part C 2010, 40, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Ahmed, M.R.; Newby, S.; Potluri, P.; Mirihanage, W.; Fernando, A. Emerging Paradigms in Fetal Heart Rate Monitoring: Evaluating the Efficacy and Application of Innovative Textile-Based Wearables. Sensors 2024, 24, 6066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Moon, K.S.; Lee, S.Q. A Wearable Multimodal Wireless Sensing System for Respiratory Monitoring and Analysis. Sensors 2023, 23, 6790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Khan Mamun, M.M.R.; Sherif, A. Advancement in the Cuffless and Noninvasive Measurement of Blood Pressure: A Review of the Literature and Open Challenges. Bioengineering 2023, 10, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Xing, Y.; Yang, K.; Lu, A.; Mackie, K.; Guo, F. Sensors and Devices Guided by Artificial Intelligence for Personalized Pain Medicine. Cyborg Bionic Syst. 2024, 13, 0160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Ding, S; Pichon, L; Chen, Y. A Low-cost Microwave Stentenna for In-stent Restenosis Detection. IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation 2025, Early Access. [CrossRef]
  36. Mohan, A; Kumar, N. Implantable antennas for biomedical applications: a systematic review. Biomed Eng Online 2024, 23(1), 87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Aliqab, K.; Nadeem, I.; Khan, S.R. A Comprehensive Review of In-Body Biomedical Antennas: Design, Challenges and Applications. Micromachines 2023, 14, 1472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Alyami, A.M.; Kirimi, M.T.; Neale, S.L.; Mercer, J.R. Implantable Biosensors for Vascular Diseases: Directions for the Next Generation of Active Diagnostic and Therapeutic Medical Device Technologies. Biosensors 2025, 15, 147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Kudłacik-Kramarczyk, S.; Kieres, W.; Przybyłowicz, A.; Ziejewska, C.; Marczyk, J.; Krzan, M. Recent Advances in Micro- and Nano-Enhanced Intravascular Biosensors for Real-Time Monitoring, Early Disease Diagnosis, and Drug Therapy Monitoring. Sensors 2025, 25, 4855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Hariri, H. Design and Realization of a Piezoelectric Mobile for Cooperative Use. PhD thesis;English, University of Paris XI, 2012. Available online: https://theses.hal.science/tel-01124059v1/file/2012PA112321.pdf.
  41. Ding, Z; Cui, M; Wu, J; Wei, W; Rong, X; Li, Y. Development of an Untethered Self-Moving Piezoelectric Actuator With Load-Carriable, Fast, and Precise Movement Driven by Piezoelectric Stack Plates. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics 2025, 99, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Hariri, H; Bernard, Y; Razek, A. 2-D Traveling Wave Driven Piezoelectric Plate Robot for Planar Motion. IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics 2018, 23(1), 242–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Hariri, H; Bernard, Y; Razek, A. A traveling wave piezoelectric beam robot. Smart Materials and Structures 2014, 23(2), 025013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Yang, Z; Dong, L; Wang, M; Liu, G; Li, X; Li, Y. A wearable insulin delivery system based on a piezoelectric micropump. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical 2022, 347, 113909. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Hernandez, C; Bernard, Y; Razek, A. Design and manufacturing of a piezoelectric traveling-wave pumping device. IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics, and Frequency Control 2013, 60(9), 1949–1956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Spanner, K.; Koc, B. Piezoelectric Motors, an Overview. Actuators 2016, 5, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Ghenna, S; Bernard, Y; Daniel, L. Design and experimental analysis of a high force piezoelectric linear motor. Mechatronics 2023, 89, 102928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Wang, S; Rong, W; Wang, L; Xie, H; Sun, L; Mills, JK. A survey of piezoelectric actuators with long working stroke in recent years: Classifications, principles, connections and distinctions. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 2019, 123, 591–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Tian, X; Liu, Y; Deng, J; Wang, L; Chen, W. A review on piezoelectric ultrasonic motors for the past decade: Classification, operating principle, performance, and future work perspectives. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical 2020, 306, 111971. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Bhuva, A.N.; Moralee, R.; Brunker, T.; Lascelles, K.; Cash, L.; Patel, K.P.; Lowe, M.; Sekhri, N.; Alpendurada, F.; Pennell, D.J.; et al. Evidence to support magnetic resonance conditional labelling of all pacemaker and defibrillator leads in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices. Eur. Heart J. 2022, 43, 2469–2478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Joo, H.; Lee, Y.; Kim, J.; Yoo, J.S.; Yoo, S.; Kim, S.; Arya, A.K.; Kim, S.; Choi, S.H.; Lu, N.; et al. Soft Implantable Drug Delivery Device Integrated Wirelessly with Wearable Devices to Treat Fatal Seizures. Sci. Adv. 2021, 7, eabd4639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Cheng, Y.; Xie, D.; Han, Y.; Guo, S.; Sun, Z.; Jing, L.; Man, W.; Liu, D.; Yang, K.; Lei, D.; et al. Precise management system for chronic intractable pain patients implanted with spinal cord stimulation based on a remote programming platform: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (PreMaSy study). Trials 2023, 24, 580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Gordon, J.S.; Maynes, E.J.; O’Malley, T.J.; Pavri, B.B.; Tchantchaleishvili, V. Electromagnetic interference between implantable cardiac devices and continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices: A review. J. Interv. Card. Electrophysiol. 2021, 61, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Tetteh, E.; Wang, T.; Kim, J.Y.; Smith, T.; Norasi, H.; Van Straaten, M.G.; Lal, G.; Chrouser, K.L.; Shao, J.M.; Hallbeck, M.S. Optimizing ergonomics during open, laparoscopic, and robotic-assisted surgery: A review of surgical ergonomics literature and development of educational illustrations. Am. J. Surg. 2024, 235, 115551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Alkatout, I.; Mechler, U.; Mettler, L.; Pape, J.; Maass, N.; Biebl, M.; Gitas, G.; Laganà, A.S.; Freytag, D. The Development of Laparoscopy-A Historical Overview. Front. Surg. 2021, 8, 799442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Barrios, E.L.; Polcz, V.E.; Hensley, S.E.; Sarosi, G.A., Jr.; Mohr, A.M.; Loftus, T.J.; Upchurch, G.R., Jr.; Sumfest, J.M.; Efron, P.A.; Dunleavy, K.; et al. A narrative review of ergonomic problems, principles, and potential solutions in surgical operations. Surgery 2023, 174, 214–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Bittner, R. Laparoscopic surgery--15 years after clinical introduction. World J Surg. 2006, 30(7), 1190–1203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Pérez-Salazar, M.J.; Caballero, D.; Sánchez-Margallo, J.A.; Sánchez-Margallo, F.M. Comparative Study of Ergonomics in Conventional and Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery. Sensors 2024, 24, 3840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Li, S.Y.; Wang, Y.; Xin, C.; Ji, L.Q.; Li, S.H.; Jiang, W.D.; Zhang, C.M.; Zhang, W.; Lou, Z. Laparoscopic surgery is associated with increased risk of postoperative peritoneal metastases in T4 colon cancer: A propensity score analysis. Int. J. Colorectal. Dis. 2025, 40, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Taghavi, K.; Glenisson, M.; Loiselet, K.; Fiorenza, V.; Cornet, M.; Capito, C.; Vinit, N.; Pire, A.; Sarnacki, S.; Blanc, T. Robot-assisted laparoscopic adrenalectomy: Extended application in children. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 2024, 50, 108627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Williamson, T.; Song, S.E. Robotic Surgery Techniques to Improve Traditional Laparoscopy. JSLS 2022, 26, e2022.00002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Rivero-Moreno, Y.; Echevarria, S.; Vidal-Valderrama, C.; Pianetti, L.; Cordova-Guilarte, J.; Navarro-Gonzalez, J.; Acevedo-Rodríguez, J.; Dorado-Avila, G.; Osorio-Romero, L.; Chavez-Campos, C.; et al. Robotic Surgery: A Comprehensive Review of the Literature and Current Trends. Cureus 2023, 15, e42370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Lima, V.L.; de Almeida, R.C.; Neto, T.R.; Rosa, A.A.M. Chapter 72—Robotic ophthalmologic surgery. In Handbook of Robotic Surgery; Zequi, S.C., Ren, H., Eds.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2025; pp. 701–704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Rivero-Moreno, Y.; Rodriguez, M.; Losada-Muñoz, P.; Redden, S.; Lopez-Lezama, S.; Vidal-Gallardo, A.; Machado-Paled, D.; Cordova Guilarte, J.; Teran-Quintero, S. Autonomous Robotic Surgery: Has the Future Arrived? Cureus 2024, 16, e52243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Han, J.; Davids, J.; Ashrafian, H.; Darzi, A.; Elson, D.S.; Sodergren, M. A systematic review of robotic surgery: From supervised paradigms to fully autonomous robotic approaches. Int. J. Med. Robot. 2022, 18, e2358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Lee, A.; Baker, T.S.; Bederson, J.B.; Rapoport, B.I. Levels of autonomy in FDA-cleared surgical robots: A systematic review. NPJ Digit. Med. 2024, 7, 103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Wan, Q.; Shi, Y.; Xiao, X.; Li, X.; Mo, H. Review of Human–Robot Collaboration in Robotic Surgery. Adv. Intell. Syst. 2024, 7(2), 2400319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Liu, T.; Wang, J.; Wong, S.; Razjigaev, A.; Beier, S.; Peng, S.; Do, T.N.; Song, S.; Chu, D.; Wang, C.H.; et al. A Review on the Form and Complexity of Human–Robot Interaction in the Evolution of Autonomous Surgery. Adv. Intell. Syst. 2024, 6, 2400197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Schreiter, J.; Schott, D.; Schwenderling, L.; Hansen, C.; Heinrich, F.; Joeres, F. AR-Supported Supervision of Conditional Autonomous Robots: Considerations for Pedicle Screw Placement in the Future. J. Imaging 2022, 8, 255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Dagnino, G; Kundrat, D. Robot-assistive minimally invasive surgery: trends and future directions. Int J Intell Robot Appl 2024, 8, 812–826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Chinzei, K.; Hata, N.; Jolesz, F.A.; Kikinis, R. Surgical Assist Robot for the Active Navigation in the Intraoperative MRI: Hardware Design Issues. In Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS 2000) (Cat. No.00CH37113), Takamatsu, Japan, 31 October–5 November 2000; pp. 727–732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Tsekos, N.V.; Khanicheh, A.; Christoforou, E.; Mavroidis, C. Magnetic resonance-compatible robotic and mechatronics systems for image-guided interventions and rehabilitation: A review study. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 2007, 9, 351–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Faoro, G.; Maglio, S.; Pane, S.; Iacovacci, V.; Menciassi, A. An artificial intelligence-aided robotic platform for ultrasound-guided transcarotid revascularization. IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. 2023, 8, 2349–2356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Su, H.; Kwok, K.W.; Cleary, K.; Iordachita, I.I.; Çavuşoğlu, M.C.; Desai, J.P.; Fischer, G.S. State of the art and future opportunities in MRI-guided robot-assisted surgery and interventions. Proc. IEEE Inst. Electr. Electron. Eng. 2022, 110, 968–992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Padhan, J.; Tsekos, N.; Al-Ansari, A.; Abinahed, J.; Deng, Z.; Navkar, N.V. Dynamic Guidance Virtual Fixtures for Guiding Robotic Interventions: Intraoperative MRI-guided Transapical Cardiac Intervention Paradigm. In Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE 22nd International Conference on Bioinformatics and Bioengineering (BIBE), Taichung, Taiwan, 7–9 November 2022; pp. 265–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Singh, S.; Torrealdea, F.; Bandula, S. MR imaging-guided intervention: Evaluation of MR conditional biopsy and ablation needle tip artifacts at 3T using a balanced fast field echo sequence. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 2021, 32, 1068–1074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Xu, L.; Pacia, C.P.; Gong, Y.; Hu, Z.; Chien, C.Y.; Yang, L.; Gach, H.M.; Hao, Y.; Comron, H.; Huang, J.; et al. Characterization of the targeting accuracy of a neuronavigation-guided transcranial FUS system in vitro, in vivo, and in silico. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 2023, 70, 1528–1538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Navarro-Becerra, J.A.; Borden, M.A. Targeted Microbubbles for Drug, Gene, and Cell Delivery in Therapy and Immunotherapy. Pharmaceutics 2023, 15, 1625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Delaney, L.J.; Isguven, S.; Eisenbrey, J.R.; Hickok, N.J.; Forsberg, F. Making waves: How ultrasound-targeted drug delivery is changing pharmaceutical approaches. Mater. Adv. 2022, 3, 3023–3040. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Remyes, D.; Nasef, D.; Remyes, S.; Tawfellos, J.; Sher, M.; Nasef, D.; Toma, M. Clinical Applicability and Cross-Dataset Validation of Machine Learning Models for Binary Glaucoma Detection. Information 2025, 16(6), 432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Balyen, L.; Peto, T. Promising Artificial Intelligence-Machine Learning-Deep Learning Algorithms in Ophthalmology. Asia-Pac. J. Ophthalmol. 2019, 8, 264–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Husain, G; Mayer, J; Bekbolatova, M; Vathappallil, P; Matalia, M; Toma, M. Machine learning for medical image classification. Academia Medicine 2024, 1, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Jha, G; Dhanjal, R; Malasani, S; Karunakaran, AV. Deep Learning in Scaphoid Fracture Detection and Healing Prediction: A Systematic Review of Artificial Intelligence Applications in Hand Surgery. Cureus 2025, 17(11), e97900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Tougui, I; Jilbab, A; Mhamdi, JE. Impact of the choice of cross-validation techniques on the results of machine learning-based diagnostic applications. Healthc Inform Res. 2021, 27(3), 189–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Pelletier, ED; Jeffries, SD; Song, K; Hemmerling, TM. Comparative analysis of machine-learning model performance in image analysis: The impact of dataset diversity and size. Anesth Analg. 2024, 139(6), 1332–1339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Yuan, H. Toward real-world deployment of machine learning for health care: External validation, continual monitoring, and randomized clinical trials. Health Care Sci. 2024, 3(5), 360–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Oke, I.; VanderVeen, D. Machine Learning Applications in Pediatric Ophthalmology. Semin. Ophthalmol. 2021, 36, 210–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Alsaih, K.; Lemaitre, G.; Rastgoo, M.; Massich, J.; Sidibé, D.; Meriaudeau, F. Machine learning techniques for diabetic macular edema (DME) classification on SD-OCT images. BioMed. Eng. OnLine 2017, 16, 68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Sher, M.; Remyes, D.; Sharma, R.; Toma, M. Learning Dynamics Analysis: Assessing Generalization of Machine Learning Models for Optical Coherence Tomography Multiclass Classification. Informatics 2025, 12, 128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. De Benedictis, A; Mazzocca, N; Somma, A; Strigaroet, C. Digital twins in healthcare: An architectural proposal and its application in a social distancing case study. IEEE J Biomed Health Inform. 2022, 27, 5143–5154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Haleem, A; Javaid, M; Singh, RP; Suman, R. Exploring the revolution in healthcare systems through the applications of digital twin technology. Biomed Technol. 2023, 4, 28–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Mohamed, N; Al-Jaroodi, J; Jawhar, I; Kesserwan, N. Leveraging digital twins for healthcare systems engineering. IEEE Access 2023, 11, 69841–69853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Ricci, A; Croatti, A; Montagna, S. Pervasive and connected digital twins-a vision for digital health. IEEE Internet Comput. 2022, 26, 26–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Wickramasinghe, N; Ulapane, N; Sloane, EB; Gehlot, V. Digital Twins for More Precise and Personalized Treatment. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2024, 310, 229–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Song, Y. Human digital twin, the development and impact on design. J Comput Inf Sci Eng. 2023, 23, 060819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Burattini, S; Montagna, S; Croatti, A; Gentili, N; Ricci, A; Leonardi, L; Pandolfini, S; Tosi, S. An Ecosystem of Digital Twins for Operating Room Management. In In: Proceedings of the 2023 IEEE 36th International Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems (CBMS), L’Aquila, Italy, 2023; pp. 770–775. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Hagmann, K; Hellings-Kuß, A; Klodmann, J; Richter, R; Stulp, F; Leidner, D. A digital twin approach for contextual assistance for surgeons during surgical robotics training. Front Robot AI 2021, 8, 735566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Nadeem, M; Kostic, S; Dornhöfer, M; Weber, C; Fathi, M. A comprehensive review of digital twin in healthcare in the scope of simulative health-monitoring. Digit Health 2025, 11, 20552076241304078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Jia, X.; Zhang, Y.; Du, H.; Yu, Y. Experimental study of double cable-conduit driving device for MRI compatible biopsy robots. J. Mech. Med. Biol. 2021, 21, 2140014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Li, X.; Young, A.S.; Raman, S.S.; Lu, D.S.; Lee, Y.H.; Tsao, T.C.; Wu, H.H. Automatic needle tracking using Mask R-CNN for MRI-guided percutaneous interventions. Int. J. Comput. Assist. Radiol. Surg. 2020, 15, 1673–1684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  101. Bernardes, M.C.; Moreira, P.; Lezcano, D.; Foley, L.; Tuncali, K.; Tempany, C.; Kim, J.S.; Hata, N.; Iordachita, I.; Tokuda, J. In Vivo Feasibility Study: Evaluating Autonomous Data-Driven Robotic Needle Trajectory Correction in MRI-Guided Transperineal Procedures. IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. 2024, 9, 8975–8982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Wu, D.; Li, G.; Patel, N.; Yan, J.; Monfaredi, R.; Cleary, K.; Iordachita, I. Remotely Actuated Needle Driving Device for MRI-Guided Percutaneous Interventions: Force and Accuracy Evaluation. In Proceedings of the 2019 41st Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society (EMBC), Berlin, Germany, 23–27 July 2019; pp. 1985–1989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Panyaram, S. Integrating Artificial Intelligence with Big Data for Real-Time Insights and Decision-Making in Complex Systems. FMDB Transactions on Sustainable Intelligent Networks 2024, 1(2), 85–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Deliu, D.; Olariu, A. The Role of Artificial Intelligence and Big Data Analytics in Shaping the Future of Professions in Industry 6.0: Perspectives from an Emerging Market. Electronics 2024, 13, 4983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Himeur, Y; Elnour, M; Fadli, F; Meskin, N; Petri, I; Rezgui, Y; Bensaali, F; Amira, A. AI-big data analytics for building automation and management systems: a survey, actual challenges and future perspectives. Artif Intell Rev. 2023, 56(6), 4929–5021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Parmar, A. AI-driven data analytics for real-time decision-making. Int. journal of progressive research in engineering management and science 2025, 5(5), 372–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Vallée, A. Digital twins for cardiovascular diseases: towards personalised and sustainable care. Acta Cardiologica 2025, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Kantor, T; Mahajan, P; Murthi, S; Stegink, C; Brawn, B; Varshney, A; Reddy, RM. Role of eXtended Reality use in medical imaging interpretation for pre-surgical planning and intraoperative augmentation. J Med Imaging (Bellingham) 2024, 11(6), 062607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Elkefi, S.; Asan, O. Digital twins for managing health care systems: Rapid literature review. J. Med. Internet Res. 2022, 24, e37641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Cellina, M.; Cè, M.; Alì, M.; Irmici, G.; Ibba, S.; Caloro, E.; Fazzini, D.; Oliva, G.; Papa, S. Digital Twins: The New Frontier for Personalized Medicine? Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 7940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Song, H; Oh, Y; Choi, J; Ohm, SY. Effectiveness of Virtual Reality-Based Cognitive Control Training Game for Children With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Symptoms: Preliminary Effectiveness Study. JMIR Pediatr Parent 2025, 19, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Kayaalp, ME; Konstantinou, E; Karaismailoglu, B; Lucidi, GA; Kaymakoglu, M; Vieider, R; Giusto, JD; Inoue, J; Hirschmann, MT. The metaverse in orthopaedics: Virtual, augmented and mixed reality for advancing surgical training, arthroscopy, arthroplasty and rehabilitation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2025, 33(8), 3039–3050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  113. Faizan Siddiqui, M; Jabeen, S; Alwazzan, A; Vacca, S; Dalal, L; Al-Haddad, B; Jaber, A; Ballout, FF; Abou Zeid, HK; Haydamous, J; El Hajj Chehade, R; Kalmatov, R. Integration of Augmented Reality, Virtual Reality, and Extended Reality in Healthcare and Medical Education: A Glimpse into the Emerging Horizon in LMICs-A Systematic Review. J Med Educ Curric Dev. 2025, 29(12), 23821205251342315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  114. Pantusin, F.J.; Ortiz, J.S.; Carvajal, C.P.; Andaluz, V.H.; Yar, L.G.; Roberti, F.; Gandolfo, D. Digital Twin Integration for Active Learning in Robotic Manipulator Control Within Engineering 4.0. Symmetry 2025, 17, 1638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Sang, AY; Wang, X; Paxton, L. Technological Advancements in Augmented, Mixed, and Virtual Reality Technologies for Surgery: A Systematic Review. Cureus 2024, 16(12), e76428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Ai, X; Agrawal, SK. Remote Extended Reality with Markerless Motion Tracking for Sitting Posture Training. IEEE Robot Autom Lett. 2024, 9(11), 9860–9867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Morimoto, T; Hirata, H; Ueno, M; Fukumori, N; Sakai, T; Sugimoto, M; Kobayashi, T; Tsukamoto, M; Yoshihara, T; Toda, Y; Oda, Y; Otani, K; Mawatari, M. Digital Transformation Will Change Medical Education and Rehabilitation in Spine Surgery. Medicina (Kaunas) 2022, 58(4), 508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Cox, S; Kadlubsky, A; Svarverud, E; Adams, J; Baraas, RC; Bernabe, RDLC. A scoping review of the ethics frameworks describing issues related to the use of extended reality. Open Res Eur. 2025, 4, 74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Mahajan, A; Heydari, K; Powell, D. Wearable AI to enhance patient safety and clinical decision-making. npj Digit. Med. 2025, 8, 176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Antonakea, N.K; Chapiro, J; Geschwind, J. The Role of AI in Clinical Trial Design and Scientific Writing. In Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol; 2025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Jasti, J; Zhong, H; Panwar, V; Jarmale, V; Miyata, J; Carrillo, D; Christie, A; Rakheja, D; Modrusan, Z; Kadel, EE, 3rd; Beig, N; Huseni, M; Brugarolas, J; Kapur, P; Rajaram, S. Histopathology based AI model predicts anti-angiogenic therapy response in renal cancer clinical trial. Nat Commun 2025, 16, 2610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Mahajan, A; Powell, D. Transforming healthcare delivery with conversational AI platforms. npj Digit. Med. 2025, 8, 581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Łukaniszyn, M.; Majka, Ł.; Grochowicz, B.; Mikołajewski, D.; Kawala-Sterniuk, A. Digital Twins Generated by Artificial Intelligence in Personalized Healthcare. Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 9404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Kabir, MR; Shishir, FS; Shomaji, S; Ray, S. Digital twins in healthcare IoT: A systematic review. High-Confidence Computing 2025, 5(3), 100340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Chen, J; Kobayashi, E; Sakuma, I; Tomii, N. SurgEM: A Vision-Based Surgery Environment Modeling Framework for Constructing a Digital Twin Toward Autonomous Soft Tissue Manipulation. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters 2024, 9(11), 9789–9796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Chen, J; Jastrzebska-Perfect, P; Chai, P; Say, MG; Tu, J; Gao, W; Halperin, F; Korzenik, J; Huang, HW; Katabi, D; Traverso, G. Barriers to translating continuous monitoring technologies for preventative medicine. Nat Biomed Eng. 2025, 9(11), 1797–1815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Hara, T; Morihiro, Y; Horise, Y; Komatsu, S; Ohashi, M; Kitatsuji, H; Yao, A; Muragaki, Y; Miyake, H. Toward safe clinical deployment of remote robotic surgery in Japan: five-year validation of the hinotori™ system using 5G wireless communication. Int J Clin Oncol. 2025, 30(12), 2389–2398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Wang, N; Ying, Y; Wang, W; Liu, J; Wu, D; Zhao, Y. Intelligent sensing and measurement technologies for medical robotics: A review. Sensors and Actuators 2025, 394, 116956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Ghadi, YY; Shah, SFA; Waheed, W; Mazhar, T; Ahmad, W; Saeed, MM; Hamam, H. Integration of wearable technology and artificial intelligence in digital health for remote patient care. J Cloud Comp 2025, 14, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Sharma, P. Smart healthcare: the role of AI, robotics, and NLP in advancing telemedicine and remote patient monitoring. BMC Artif. Intell. 2025, 1, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Deng, Z.; Guo, L.; Chen, X.; Wu, W. Smart Wearable Systems for Health Monitoring. Sensors 2023, 23, 2479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Jiao, H; Wang, T; Libaers, D; Yang, J; Hu, L. The relationship between digital technologies and innovation: A review, critique, and research agenda. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge 2025, 10(1), 100638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Saeedikiya, M; Salunke, S; Kowalkiewicz, M. The nexus of digital transformation and innovation: A multilevel framework and research agenda. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge 2025, 10(1), 100640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Bamel, U; Talwar, S; Pereira, V; Corazza, L; Dhir, A. Disruptive digital innovations in healthcare: Knowing the past and anticipating the future. Technovation 2023, 125, 102785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Singh, N; Jain, M; Kamal, MM; Bodhi, R; Gupta, B. Technological paradoxes and artificial intelligence implementation in healthcare. An application of paradox theory. Technolog. Forecasting and Social Change 2024, 198, 122967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Alshehri, S.; Alahmari, K.A.; Alasiry, A. A Comprehensive Evaluation of AI-Assisted Diagnostic Tools in ENT Medicine: Insights and Perspectives from Healthcare Professionals. J. Pers. Med. 2024, 14, 354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Alamri, AH; AlZabin, A; Magboul, N; Alrasheed, AS; Alokby, G; Alroqi, A. Comparative analysis of artificial intelligence platforms in generating Post-Operative instructions for endoscopic transnasal skull base surgery. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Grijalvo, M; Ordieres-Meré, J; Uche-Soria, M; Tabuenca, B; Aladro-Benito, Y. Apps and knowledge contributing to creating value for ehealth solutions. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge 2026, 12, 100886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Harrison, S; Maple, C; Epiphaniou, G; Arvanitis, TN. Improving safety claims in digital health interventions using the digital health assessment method. DIGITAL HEALTH 2024, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Harrison, S; Islam, SU; Waseem, HM; Epiphaniou, G. Digital health interventions use cases: Classification and taxonomy development, a scoping review. DIGITAL HEALTH 2025, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Xue, Z; Gai, Y; Wu, Y; Liu, Z; Li, Z. Wearable mechanical and electrochemical sensors for real-time health monitoring. Commun Mater 2024, 5, 211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Ji, J; Su, T; Lu, J; Gao, X; Zhang, L. Progress in the flexible and stretchable epidermal electrodes for wearable ECG monitoring. BME Horiz. 2025, 3, 202510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Dias, FE; Braga, SD; Xavier, ACG; da Paz, GM; Veras, R de M S; Paiva, AC. Cervical cancer classification from Pap smear cells using machine learning models. Academia Oncology 2025, 2(4). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Piechowiak, M.; Goch, A.; Panas, E.; Masiak, J.; Mikołajewski, D.; Rojek, I.; Mikołajewska, E. From Local to Global Perspective in AI-Based Digital Twins in Healthcare. Appl. Sci. 2026, 16, 83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Rojek, I.; Prokopowicz, P.; Piechowiak, M.; Kotlarz, P.; Náprstková, N.; Mikołajewski, D. The Impact of Data Analytics Based on Internet of Things, Edge Computing, and Artificial Intelligence on Energy Efficiency in Smart Environment. Appl. Sci. 2026, 16, 225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Zimatore, G.; Russo, S.; Gallotta, M.C.; Passalacqua, G.; Zaborova, V.; Campanella, M.; Fiani, F.; Baldari, C.; Napoli, C.; Randieri, C. HRV in Stress Monitoring by AI: A Scoping Review. Appl. Sci. 2026, 16, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Montoya-Gálvez, J.; Ivankovic, K.; Rocamora, R.; Principe, A. The Therapeutic Loop: Closed-Loop Epilepsy Systems Mirroring the Read–Write Architecture of Brain–Computer Interfaces. Appl. Sci. 2026, 16, 294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Syrek, P.; Skowron, M. Transcranial Brain Stimulation: Technical, Computational, and Clinical Aspects in Contemporary Research. Appl. Sci. 2026, 16, 107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Lee, J.; Kang, S.; Hong, S.W. Flexible Micro-Neural Interface Devices: Advances in Materials Integration and Scalable Manufacturing Technologies. Appl. Sci. 2026, 16, 125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Caixeiro, D.; Cordeiro, T.; Constantino, L.; Carreira, J.; Mendes, R.; Silva, C.G.; Castro, M.A. Effectiveness of Wearable Devices for Posture Correction: A Systematic Review of Evidence from Randomized and Quasi-Experimental Studies. Appl. Sci. 2026, 16, 81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Li, P; Lang, S; Xie, L; Zhang, Y; Gou, X; Zhang, C; Dong, C; Li, C; Yang, J. Skin-Inspired Ultra-Linear Flexible Iontronic Pressure Sensors for Wearable Musculoskeletal Monitoring. Nanomicro Lett. 2025, 18(1), 55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  152. Di Palo, M.P.; del Sorbo, R.; Pessolano, C.; Mongelli, G.; Bartolomeo, M.; Giordano, M.; Ragusa, C.M. AI-Driven Intervention with Wearable Remote Monitoring Devices for Human Health. In Product-Focused Software Process Improvement. Industry, Doctoral-Symposium, Tutorial, and Workshop Papers. PROFES 2025. Lecture Notes in Computer Science; Scanniello, G., Lenarduzzi, V., Romano, S., Vegas, S., Francese, R., Eds.; Springer: Cham, 2026; p. 16362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Wang, W; Luo, Z; Yu, X; Yin, X; Xiang, L; Pan, A. A Highly Permeable and Three-Dimensional Integrated Electronic System for Wearable Human-Robot Interaction. Nanomicro Lett. 2026, 18(1), 128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  154. Zhang, Y; Qiu, S; Du, K; Wu, S; Xiang, T; Zheng, K; Liu, Z; Chen, H; Ji, N; Wang, F; Wu, W; Zhang, YT. Artificial Intelligence-Enhanced Wearable Blood Pressure Monitoring in Resource-Limited Settings: A Co-Design of Sensors, Model, and Deployment. Nanomicro Lett. 2026, 18(1), 164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Qu, X.; Wan, J.; Zhao, H.; et al. Closed-loop wearable neurostimulation system with triboelectric sensing to alleviate hemifacial spasms. Nat Commun 2025, 16, 11148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Wang, Shasha; Wei, Leqian; Wang, Fujun; Wang, Lu; Mao, Jifu. Advanced implantable energy storage for powering medical devices. eScience, Volume 5 5(2025), 100409. [CrossRef]
  157. Lan, Y; Li, S; Guo, H; Liu, Q; Wang, T; Zhou, L; Fang, J; Zhao, Y; Zhou, Z; Wang, Q; Li, J; Zhu, Y; Su, R; Wen, X; Xu, X; Wu, Y; Wang, Z; Liu, B; Li, J; Li, H; Gao, H; Wu, Y; Gu, Q; Feng, XQ; Yu, X; Su, Y. Soft biodegradable implants for long-distance and wide-angle sensing. Nature 2026, 649(8096), 366–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Velaga, ST; Jia, K; Rimsky, E; Saouma, S; Shah, R; Akhrass, P; Kowalski, M; Parikh, V. Procedural and short-term performance outcomes of dual-chamber leadless pacemakers from a single-center experience. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Klimasz, K.; Tomasik, J.T.; Tomasik, P.J. History of Urinalysis. Appl. Sci. 2026, 16, 175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Benabderrahmane, F.; Kerkouche, E.; Bouchemal, N. Risk-Aware Privacy-Preserving Federated Learning for Remote Patient Monitoring: A Multi-Layer Adaptive Security Framework. Appl. Sci. 2026, 16, 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Rogers, S.L.; Canes, T.; Pallister, A. User Experience in Virtual Self-Disclosure: Appraising Natural, Urban, and Artificial VR Environments. Appl. Sci. 2026, 16, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Zhong, H; Wang, H; Huang, B; Liu, S; Song, Z; Tang, Y; Li, J; Ye, Y; Zhou, M. Current frontier technologies in spinal cord injury research: A narrative review. Advanced Technology in Neuroscience 2026, 2(4), 173–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Naderi, A.; Ghanbarpour, G.; Ghanbarpour, M.; Haghiri, S.; Ahmadi, A. Sinoatrial node cells implementation by low cost digital hardware. Analog. Integr. Circuits Signal Process. 2026, 126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Saigre, T.; Prud’Homme, C.; Szopos, M.; Chabannes, V. A coupled fluid-dynamics-heat transfer model for 3D simulations of the aqueous humor flow in the human eye. arXiv. 2024. Available online: https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.19353.
  165. Cornetta, G.; Touhafi, A.; Contreras, J.; Zaragoza, A. Multi-Fidelity Surrogate Models for Accelerated Multi-Objective Analog Circuit Design and Optimization. Electronics 2026, 15, 105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Qiao, L.; Qin, J.; Lin, B.; Zhang, F.; Jiang, M. Tension–Torsion Coupling Analysis and Structural Parameter Optimization of Conductor Based on RBFNN Surrogate Model. Appl. Sci. 2026, 16, 408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Gallardo Romero, G.; Rodríguez-Llorente, G.; Magariños Rodríguez, L.; Morant Navascués, R.; Khvatkin Petrovsky, N.; Lorenzo Ortega, R.; Gómez-Espinosa Martín, R. Differentiable Deep Learning Surrogate Models Applied to the Optimization of the IFMIF-DONES Facility. Particles 2025, 8, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Razek, A. Biological and Medical Disturbances Due to Exposure to Fields Emitted by Electromagnetic Energy Devices—A Review. Energies 2022, 15, 4455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Laganà, F.; Bibbò, L.; Calcagno, S.; De Carlo, D.; Pullano, S.A.; Pratticò, D.; Angiulli, G. Smart Electronic Device-Based Monitoring of SAR and Temperature Variations in Indoor Human Tissue Interaction. Appl. Sci. 2025, 15, 2439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Razek, A. Assessment of a Functional Electromagnetic Compatibility Analysis of Near-Body Medical Devices Subject to Electromagnetic Field Perturbation. Electronics 2023, 12, 4780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. De Leo, A. Special Issue on Advanced Technologies in Electromagnetic Compatibility. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 8975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Qiu, Y.; Gao, T.; Smith, B.R. Mechanical deformation and death of circulating tumor cells in the bloodstream. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2024, 43, 1489–1510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  173. Wu, L.; Huang, R.; Zhu, J.; Ma, X. A Dynamic Mechanical Analysis Device for In Vivo Material Characterization of Plantar Soft Tissue. Technologies 2025, 13, 191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Vinchurkar, K.; Bukke, S.P.N.; Jain, P.; Bhadoria, J.; Likhariya, M.; Mane, S.; Suryawanshi, M.; Veerabhadrappa, K.V.; Eftekhari, Z.; Onohuean, H. Advances in sustainable biomaterials: Characterizations, and applications in medicine. Discov. Polym. 2025, 2, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  175. Oh, C.; Kim, Y.M.; Lee, T.; Lee, S.M.; Jung, J.; Bae, H.M.; Kim, C.; Lee, H.J. Patch-type capacitive micromachined ultrasonic transducer for ultrasonic power and data transfer. Microsyst. Nanoeng. 2025, 11, 124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  176. Mizna, S.; Arora, S.; Saluja, P.; Das, G.; Alanesi, W.A. An analytic research and review of the literature on practice of artificial intelligence in healthcare. Eur. J. Med. Res. 2025, 30, 382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Gowri, V.; Uma, M.; Sethuramalingam, P. Machine learning enabled robot-assisted virtual health monitoring system design and development. Multiscale Multidiscip. Model. Exp. Des. 2024, 7, 2259–2288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Gitto, S.; Giuliani, G.; Lasciarrea, A. A Digital Twin System to Enable Better Healthcare Management. In Hybrid Human-AI Collaborative Networks;PRO-VE 2025. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology; Camarinha-Matos, L.M., Ortiz, A., Boucher, X., Lucas Soares, A., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2026; p. 770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Yadav, S; Mondal, J; Saha, M. Systems biology approaches for multi omics integration using artificial intelligence. Academia Biology 2026, 4(1). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Bartusik-Aebisher, D.; Justin Raj, D.R.; Aebisher, D. Artificial Intelligence in Medical Diagnostics: Foundations, Clinical Applications, and Future Directions. Appl. Sci. 2026, 16, 728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Illustration of expression connections in Section 2, Section 3, Section 4, Section 5 and Section 6 (indicated in red).
Figure 1. Illustration of expression connections in Section 2, Section 3, Section 4, Section 5 and Section 6 (indicated in red).
Preprints 196808 g001
Figure 2. Representation of a closed-loop controlled autonomous procedure including the scanner, interventional tool, robotic actuation, and control together with the imaged, restricted worried zone [22].
Figure 2. Representation of a closed-loop controlled autonomous procedure including the scanner, interventional tool, robotic actuation, and control together with the imaged, restricted worried zone [22].
Preprints 196808 g002
Figure 3. Recapitulated choice strategies related to scanner and robotic actuating instruments in an image-guided robotic intervention [21,22].
Figure 3. Recapitulated choice strategies related to scanner and robotic actuating instruments in an image-guided robotic intervention [21,22].
Preprints 196808 g003
Figure 4. Case of a TW piezoelectric incorporated mini-robot loaded by a slight mass running on a coarse surface [40].
Figure 4. Case of a TW piezoelectric incorporated mini-robot loaded by a slight mass running on a coarse surface [40].
Preprints 196808 g004
Figure 5. Schematic diagram of a TW mini piezoelectric pump moving a fluid at a precisely controlled flow rate [45].
Figure 5. Schematic diagram of a TW mini piezoelectric pump moving a fluid at a precisely controlled flow rate [45].
Preprints 196808 g005
Figure 6. Example of actuated robotic arm joints in a prototype actuated by PZM technologies [21].
Figure 6. Example of actuated robotic arm joints in a prototype actuated by PZM technologies [21].
Preprints 196808 g006
Figure 7. Summarized complementary roles of DT, AI and XR in managing of autonomous robotic medical procedures.
Figure 7. Summarized complementary roles of DT, AI and XR in managing of autonomous robotic medical procedures.
Preprints 196808 g007
Figure 8. Illustration of monitoring of MRI-assisted autonomous intervention supported by AI via DT augmented by XR.
Figure 8. Illustration of monitoring of MRI-assisted autonomous intervention supported by AI via DT augmented by XR.
Preprints 196808 g008
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
Prerpints.org logo

Preprints.org is a free preprint server supported by MDPI in Basel, Switzerland.

Subscribe

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

Privacy Settings

© 2026 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated