## 7 Discussion
This is generally accomplished via sensors positioned in specific points in the system. Such techniques in the case of MRI are relatively complex due to the necessity of special shielded expensive chambers and the self-perturbation effects of the measuring sensors. Additionally, the characteristics of a tested object could prove dangerous, leading to the degradation of imagery components. Furthermore, such a compatibility check is only possible for existing systems and cannot be used for the design of unbuilt systems. In these circumstances, a more advantageous solution could be a compatibility check with numerical modeling techniques via an EMC analysis for the different inserted objects. In fact, disturbances in the distribution of EMFs in a given structure caused by the introduction of an external material are related to the EMFs produced in that material. In this case, if the EMF noise is reduced or removed, the field distribution of the target structure will be marginal or not affected. * Interventional robotic operations are difficult to perform and risky for the patient. It is therefore necessary to be aware of possible adverse events in robotic interventions and healthcare robotic safety standards. Indeed, the use of robotic systems for MI intervention has recently experienced rapid growth. Despite their widespread adoption, numerous technical problems and challenges persist during procedures. Understanding the origin of potential adverse events (death, injury, device malfunctions, etc.) and their consequences for patients will help improve systems and operational procedures to prevent future incidents. Adopting advanced practices in the design and operation of robotic interventional devices and the utilization of strengthened tools for recording adverse events could reduce these avoidable incidents [139]. The involved healthcare robotic safety standards can be found in the study of [140]. * Regarding the closed-loop control of image-guided robotic procedures discussed in Section 4.1, different strategies could be exploited. For example, a shape tracking and feedback control method could be used for operative tools during MRI-guided procedures. Information from sensors and position tracking devices can be integrated to enable shape estimation of the tool under MRI and then integrated into an MRIcompatible robotic tool system. A machine learning modeling method can be used for the robotic tool, with shape tracking used for system characterization (see for example the study of [141]). * Positioning accuracy (or repeatability) was mentioned at various points in the analyses conducted. A robot's accuracy is its ability to reach a specific target in its workspace. It ensures that it can follow programmed instructions to perform tasks requiring precise positioning. Accuracy depends on the sensors, the control system, and environmental conditions (temperature, vibration, etc.). The robot's repeatability (consistency) measures how reliably it returns to the same location. It is affected by joint stability (degree of actuation drift), calibration, and durability [142]. * Perturbations in MRI-guided robotic interventions could be reciprocal. Thus, the MRI scanner is sensitive to EM interference caused by the robot, and the robot's control system may also be disturbed by the scanner's field [143]. * MRI-compatible robots could be equipped with piezoelectric actuators as mentioned in Section 5.2. The inherent motion range of these actuators is relatively small. Indeed, this range can be extended by an external means of displacement amplification, directly or indirectly, by converting piezoelectric deformation into displacement. The latter can use elaborate structures, repetition, and stepping strategies. Thus, augmented piezoelectric actuators can achieve larger strokes and responses with more degrees of freedom [144].