• RecurringMeetings
• 2014-01-14

Recurring Meeting of Cleveland Clinic Core Team

Date: January 14, 2014

Time: 10:30 AM EST

Means: In person meeting

Attendees:

1. Ahmet Erdemir
2. Jason Halloran
3. Craig Bennetts
4. Robb Colbrunn
5. Tara Bonner
6. Dylan Beckler

Agenda:

1. Discuss immediate action items from the last meeting.
2. Discuss progress of all other tasks.
3. Decide immediate action items for the next meeting.
4. Other.

Immediate Action Items:

• Jason
  • Follow-up on Tekscan Inc. interactions for acquisition of software, sensors, and accessories.
  • Follow-up with Chris Flask on enforcing image set coordinate system alignment.
• Tara
  • Acquire the candidate specimen as an elderly female specimen (anticipated to be healthy).
  • Ask the specimen supplier to look for young specimens.
  • Update specimen preparation pages to keep skin and surrounding tissue intact.
• Robb
  • Update infrastructure page on tissue testing including the testing device and necessary accessories.
• Craig
  • Overhaul imaging specifications wiki page.
• Ahmet
  • Announce that joint experimentation wiki page is ready for community review.
  • Take leadership in multimedia generation for visibility and set up a related monthly meeting with Robb and Jason.
• Ahmet and Jason
  • Meet to prepare a test problem for set definitions to support Cleveland Clinic - University of Utah monthly conference call
• Robb, Tara, Jason, Ahmet
  • Meet to finalize how joint testing with and without skin and surrounding tissue should be represented.

Notes:

1. Discuss immediate action items from the last meeting.
   • The group discussed Tekscan Inc. components for pressure measurement. Jason will follow up regarding pricing. Tara mentioned using the foot pressure device for equilibriation. We should check the range for this device.
   • Chris Flask (UH imaging) emailed Jason back about coordinate frame alignment for MRI. He stated that "we cannot rely on the images to be aligned" but that there was a way to force them to be. Jason will follow up during the trial imaging session.
   • Ahmet wrote the meeting minutes from last week and also provided feedback for the specimen preparation page.
   • Tara provided an update on a potential new specimen. It fits the qualifications for an elderly female specimen and it does not appear to the arthritic (minus a few osteophytes at the intercondylar notch, which were identified by Dr. Jones). We assume it is healthy but realize that once it is dissected it may turn out to be arthritic. This specimen will be ordered. Tara will follow up soon about ordering younger specimens.
   • Robb discussed the list of accessories for new tissue testing machine. Ahmet advised Robb to rely on the testing procedures outlined in a manuscript from previous multiscale experimentation project to qualify the testing needs for development of the hardware. It was decided to include this list of hardware in the experimentation infrastructure page as an "accessories" list along with tissue testing device description.

   • Ahmet said that Izzy Delgado-Dembie of the Department of Biomedical Engineering is following up with the acquisition of the tissue testing machine. Currently, the order is not in the hands of BioMomentum, Inc.

   • Tara summarized "cleaned" versus "intact" joint kinetics/kinematics. Data was extracted from a previous project of a BioRobotics Core and CoBi Core research sponsor. This question drives the choice to test with or without surrounding tissue for the Open Knee(s) project. A summary page including these results will be populated. It appears there is an affect of the skin and capsule, especially for internal/external rotation under low loads. Specimen 3 from the previous testing appeared to match loads between "cleaned" and "intact" states. Ahmet proposes that we test with skin, knowing that there is some uncertainty that may be attributed to the surrounding tissues, especially for IE rotation. We should consider another controlled study with successive cleaning of cadaver knees and multiple loading cycles at each state.

   • Robb discussed hardware specifications and he updated the details related to the robot that will be used to test the Open Knee(s) specimens.
   • Craig will update the imaging specifications page for next week. The specifications page will include the current protocol on top with the "notes" moved at the end of the page or to a separate discussion page. Craig will also make sure the Velcro installation for the transportation device is ready to go before the imaging test session.
   • Ahmet will prepare the joint experimentation wiki page for community review. This will be accomplished by adding relevant information to the header, much like the specimens specifications page.
   • The group should review the specimen preparation page. Tara said the details will change since we decided to test with the skin intact. She will update.
2. Discuss progress of all other tasks.
   • Previous meeting minutes were browsed to make sure the team took care of the necessary items. Ahmet summarized the specimen naming conventions in the meeting notes. Users/developers can start with this perspective to develop these specifications.
   • All listed tasks were discussed. Robotics testing specifications will be closed. There is an upcoming conference call with Stanford University. They are expected to provide an update from the previous meeting, where they had a number of tasks to accomplish.
   • In following week, the group will have a conference call with University of Utah team. A test problem for outlining creation of "element sets" in FE analysis should be provided for the Utah group. Ahmet and Jason will meet early next week to discuss.
   • The group decided that the imaging infrastructure details should be moved from imaging specifications page to an infrastructure page.
   • Robb and Tara updated the tasks related to robotics capabilities and specifically the registration between the Optotrak (Northern Digital Inc.) cameras. Registration between the Optotrak cameras is still under investigation. The initial test with additional (8 total) IRED markers to define the tip of a probe did not appear to help to increase accuracy in determining the tip point location (as opposed to the previous closely placed 3 IRED probe). Discussions centered around the development of an approach to quantify the potential errors associated with Optotrak measurements from both cameras, either individually or together.
3. Decide immediate action items for the next meeting.
   • Upcoming action items were discussed and meeting attendees agreed to their specific tasks. See Immediate Action Items above for details.
4. Other.
   • Ahmet summarized the wiki behavior with respect to image linking or attaching. We should be aware that when using "attachment" the image needs to be uploaded to the wiki. If the image is deleted from the attachments section of the wiki page, it cannot be recovered. To prevent loss of images, team members are encouraged to use the source code repository to develop and host the images and consider using the "link" option to the repository. That way the image itself will be under version control.

   • An aside from Robb, the team may want to consider creating specimen preparation videos to capture the "nuances" of this process. As Robb said, we can formally write this down but this may be well supported by videos. Ahmet "is a fan" and we should use Open Knee(s) project as a case to create these videos. An Open Knee(s) YouTube channel may be created and linked with the existing BioRobotics YouTube channel. Robb will provide leadership on the BioRobotics Core side, Ahmet from the Open Knee(s) and Jason from the CoBi Core side. The goal is to generate promotional and training videos for all groups/projects. Ahmet will setup a monthly meeting.