Progressive Experience Fusion for Multi-Task World Model Control in Endovascular Navigation
Authors: Harry Robertshaw, Maxence Boels, Nikola Fischer, Sebastien Ourselin, Christos Bergeles, Alejandro Granados, Thomas C Booth
Organizations: Surgical & Interventional Engineering, School of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, UK · Department of Neuroradiology, King’s College Hospital, UK
Autonomous endovascular navigation could support the delivery of mechanical thrombectomy to underserved areas, but controllers must navigate long, multi-stage paths across varying vascular anatomies. This study investigates Progressive Experience Fusion (PEF) to train a multi-task TD-MPC2 controller. We additionally evaluate a heuristic that changes the Model Predictive Path Integral planning horizon using residual action-sequence dispersion, and fine-tuning in a patient-specific simulation. Across five subtasks in ten known training anatomies with held-out targets, PEF achieved a mean success rate of 74%, compared with 37% for Soft Actor-Critic (p < 0.001) and 65% for base TD-MPC2 (p = 0.053). A PEF controller with adaptive-horizon planning trained on 30 vasculatures achieved a mean success rate of 90% in ten held-out vasculatures. The PEF agent successfully transferred to an unseen in vitro stroke patient vasculature under fluoroscopy, achieving a mean path ratio improvement from 63% to 80% with fine-tuning (p < 0.001), following 40x103 fine-tuning steps (corresponding to approximately 107 min of clinical inter-hospital transfer time). This work represents a proof of concept for multi-vasculature training and patient-specific adaptation, while further validation is required before clinical deployment.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1 : Study overview. Progressive Experience Fusion (PEF) organizes replay data in two stages: experience is first grouped across vascular geometries within each navigation task and is then grouped across tasks to train one multi-task TD-MPC2 controller. At run time, TD-MPC2 evaluates candidate action sequences in its latent dynamics model using Model Predictive Path Integral (MPPI) planning. The adaptive horizon heuristic increases the planning horizon when the final MPPI action-sequence proposal remains dispersed. The generalist agent is fine-tuned in silico using time-limited patient-specific interaction prior to intervention, enabling adaptation to previously unseen vascular anatomies without modifying hyperparameters.
Fig. 2 : Navigation tasks investigated. A target was randomly sampled from the set of points within the task finish area, while a guide catheter and guidewire navigated to it from a randomly sampled point in the task start area. DA: descending aorta, LCCA: left common carotid artery, LICA: left internal carotid artery, RCCA: right common carotid artery, RICA: right internal carotid artery.
Fig. 3 : In vitro 3D vascular phantom with labeled anatomy.
Fig. 4 : In vitro testbed showing the 3D vascular phantom, mobile C-arm, and robotic manipulator.
Fig. 5 : Illustration of the Progressive Experience Fusion (PEF) process. Each agent at layer l>0 is initialized from the fused post-training replay buffers of its assigned agents at layer l−1 and is subsequently trained across the combined configuration set. Its updated post-training replay buffer is then passed to the next fusion layer, culminating in the generalist policy π(L) .
Fig. 6 : Phantom vessel model under fluoroscopy, showing task start area and target locations for A2L - lower branch and A2L - upper branch . Expert neurointerventionalists typically use an access catheter with an extreme shape (Simmons catheter) for this maneuver – this task can be considered a superhuman experiment [ 33 ] .
Task
SAC
Base TD-MPC2
PEF
SR (%)
PT (s)
PR (%)
SR (%)
PT (s)
PR (%)
SR (%)
PT (s)
PR (%)
A1
96 ± 20
8.9 ± 1.6
89 ± 16
96 ± 20
16.7 ± 4.1
90 ± 3
100 ± 0
12.3 ± 2.1
−
A2L
10±30
14.5 ± 7.1
27±30
22 ± 41
17.0±6.1
45 ± 33
8 ± 27
14.7 ± 6.0
75 ± 8
A2R
8±27
12.8 ± 9.9
29±27
66 ± 47
16.5±6.2
77 ± 32
72 ± 45
28.6 ± 15.8
79 ± 29
A3L
16±37
7.2 ± 7.0
26±34
50 ± 50
13.7±6.3
66 ± 38
94 ± 24
13.6 ± 8.6
92 ± 18
A3R
56±50
5.6 ± 4.5
63±43
90 ± 30
12.9±5.8
90 ± 21
98 ± 14
42.7 ± 10.4
94 ± 2
TABLE I : In silico results per navigation task for a dataset of 10 real patient vasculatures, with mean results across all tasks and vasculatures. SAC and base TD-MPC2 results taken from [ 33 ] . Bold indicates the best value for each task (highest SR and PR; lowest PT).
Task
SAC
Base TD-MPC2
PEF
SR (%)
PT (s)
PR (%)
SR (%)
PT (s)
PR (%)
SR (%)
PT (s)
PR (%)
A1
100 ± 0
46.2 ± 3.6
−
100 ± 0
80.4±19.7
−
100 ± 0
80.6 ± 10.1
−
A2L (lower)
0 ± 0
−
70±20
40 ± 55
175.5 ± 0.7
82 ± 7
60 ± 55
173.7 ± 81.1
82 ± 6
A2L (upper)
0 ± 0
−
47±11
0 ± 0
−
71 ± 14
0 ± 0
−
72 ± 5
A2R
40±55
97.0 ± 1.4
42±4
60 ± 55
125.0±21.0
49 ± 7
80 ± 45
127 ± 51
66 ± 0
A3L
100 ± 0
54.4 ± 0
−
100 ± 0
126.4±57.7
−
100 ± 0
109.0±42.4
−
TABLE II : In vitro results per navigation task for training on a dataset of 10 real patient vasculatures and testing on a single known vasculature, with mean results across tasks. SAC and base TD-MPC2 results taken from previous work, but updated for the splitting of the A2L task [ 45 ] . Bold indicates the best value for each task (highest SR and PR; lowest PT), ‘ − ’ denotes cell is not applicable (PT is not recorded when SR is 0%, and PR is not recorded when SR is 100%).
Task
PEF
PEF + Adaptive Horizon
SR (%)
PT (s)
PR (%)
SR (%)
PT (s)
PR (%)
A1
100 ± 0
8.0 ± 0.6
−
100 ± 0
10.0±1.8
−
A2L
52±50
35.6±16.0
69±14
60 ± 49
28.5 ± 17.5
79 ± 13
A2R
96 ± 20
26.5±13.4
77 ± 26
92±27
24.6 ± 14.7
72±3
A3L
100 ± 0
19.5 ± 14.2
−
98±14
20.2±14.0
76 ± 0
A3R
96±20
20.7±16.6
62±19
100 ± 0
18.4 ± 15.8
−
TABLE III : In silico results per navigation task for 30 training and 10 unseen patient vasculatures. Bold indicates the best value for each task (highest SR and PR; lowest PT), ‘ − ’ denotes cell is not applicable (PT is not recorded when SR is 0%, and PR is not recorded when SR is 100%).
Fig. 7 : Plot of mean task success rate vs number of fine-tuning steps for a single in silico vasculature using PEF and an adaptive horizon. Training times in relation to key times are highlighted: 90min = 34×103 steps, 190min = 70×103 steps
Fig. 8 : Heatmap of individual task success rate vs number of fine-tuning steps for a single in silico vasculature using PEF and an adaptive horizon. 20×103 fine-tuning steps ≈54min .
Task
PEF + Adaptive horizon
PEF + Adaptive horizon + Fine-tuning
SR (%)
PT (s)
PR (%)
SR (%)
PT (s)
PR (%)
A1
100 ± 0
53.8 ± 4.8
−
100 ± 0
61.0±18.2
−
A2L ( lower )
20±45
157±0
77±12
40 ± 55
136.5 ± 40.3
91 ± 2
A2L ( upper )
0±0
−
67±10
0±0
−
75 ± 3
A2R
60 ± 55
167.7 ± 64.4
73±3
60 ± 55
175.7±92.6
74 ± 4
A3L
80±45
81.3±20.0
37±0
100 ± 0
57.0 ± 9.2
−
TABLE IV : In vitro results per navigation task for 30 training and one unseen patient vasculature. Bold indicates the best value for each task (highest SR and PR; lowest PT), ‘ − ’ denotes cell is not applicable (PT is not recorded when SR is 0%, and PR is not recorded when SR is 100%).
Fig. 9 : Vessel model under fluoroscopy, showing (a) successful navigation of A2L - lower branch , and (b) unsuccessful navigation of A2L - lower branch due to catheterization of the BCA (Brachiocephalic Artery).
Fig. 10 : Vessel model under fluoroscopy, showing (a) successful navigation of A2R , and (b) unsuccessful navigation of A2R due to catheterization of the RSA (Right Subclavian Artery).
Fig. 11 : Patient timeline from stroke onset to reperfusion, showing potential benefit of patient-specific fine-tuning for local admission at an MT-capable center, and outside hospital transfer to an MT-capable center. Data from [ 34 ] .
Robotic endovascular intervention uses robotic systems to navigate vascular instruments and perform procedures with greater precision, control, or autonomy.
Autonomous mechanical thrombectomy (MT) presents substantial challenges due to highly variable vascular geometries and the requirements for accurate, real-time control. While reinforcement learning (RL) has emerged as a promising paradigm for the automation of endovascular navigation, existing approaches often show limited robustness when faced with diverse patient anatomies or extended navigation horizons. In this work, we investigate a world-model-based framework for autonomous endovascular navigation built on TD-MPC2, a model-based RL method that integrates planning and learned dynamics. We evaluate a TD-MPC2 agent trained on multiple navigation tasks across hold out patient-specific vasculatures and benchmark its performance against the state-of-the-art Soft Actor-Critic (SAC) algorithm agent. Both approaches are further validated in vitro using patient-specific vascular phantoms under fluoroscopic guidance. In simulation, TD-MPC2 demonstrates a significantly higher mean success rate than SAC (58% vs. 36%, p < 0.001), and mean tip contact forces of 0.15 N, well below the proposed 1.5 N vessel rupture threshold. Mean success rates for TD-MPC2 (68%) were comparable to SAC (60%) in vitro, but TD-MPC2 achieved superior path ratios (p = 0.017) at the cost of longer procedure times (p < 0.001). Together, these results provide the first demonstration of autonomous MT navigation validated across both hold out in silico data and fluoroscopy-guided in vitro experiments, highlighting the promise of world models for safe and generalizable AI-assisted endovascular interventions.
Harry Robertshaw, Nikola Fischer, Han-Ru Wu +6
Surgical & Interventional Engineering, School of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, UK · Department of Radiology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taiwan · Department of Neuroradiology, King’s College Hospital, UK
Mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is typically the optimal treatment for acute ischemic stroke involving large vessel occlusions, but access is limited due to geographic and logistical barriers. Reinforcement learning (RL) shows promise in autonomous endovascular navigation, but generalization across 'long' navigation tasks remains challenging. We propose a Hierarchical Modular Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning (HM-MARL) framework for autonomous two-device navigation in vitro, enabling efficient and generalizable navigation. HM-MARL was developed to autonomously navigate a guide catheter and guidewire from the femoral artery to the internal carotid artery (ICA). A modular multi-agent approach was used to decompose the complex navigation task into specialized subtasks, each trained using Soft Actor-Critic RL. The framework was validated in both in silico and in vitro testbeds to assess generalization and real-world feasibility. In silico, a single-vasculature model achieved 92-100% success rates on individual anatomies, while a multi-vasculature model achieved 56-80% across multiple patient anatomies. In vitro, both HM-MARL models successfully navigated 100% of trials from the femoral artery to the right common carotid artery and 80% to the right ICA but failed on the left-side vessel superhuman challenge due to the anatomy and catheter type used in navigation. This study presents the first demonstration of in vitro autonomous navigation in MT vasculature. While HM-MARL enables generalization across anatomies, the simulation-to-real transition introduces challenges. Future work will refine RL strategies using world models and validate performance on unseen in vitro data, advancing autonomous MT towards clinical translation.
Harry Robertshaw, Nikola Fischer, Lennart Karstensen +6
School of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, Kings College London, London, UK · School of Engineering & Materials Science, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
Mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is a time-critical intervention for acute ischemic stroke; however, access remains limited due to a shortage of neuroradiologists and specialized centers. Reinforcement learning (RL) offers potential to automate endovascular navigation and improve accessibility, yet current models lack standardized frameworks to assess navigation difficulty for model training and evaluation. This study aims to identify vascular metrics associated with navigation difficulty and to develop an automated pipeline for quantitative vascular feature extraction, enabling future complexity grading. Vascular trees were segmented from computed tomography angiograms from 61 patients, and vascular metrics including aortic arch type, presence of bovine arch, vessel length, tortuosity, take-off angle, number of reverse curves, were measured using a custom pipeline. A Soft Actor-Critic RL algorithm was used for 120 s autonomous navigation. Outcomes were analyzed using both mixed effects linear and logistic regression. On the left side, the presence of a bovine arch and aortic arch type II/III increased navigation time by 30.19 s and 37.92 s, respectively, while greater tortuosity (\b{eta} = 118.20) further prolonged the procedure and reduced success probability. On the right side, type II/III arches extended procedure time by 45.94 s, while each additional reverse curve was associated with 3.96 s longer navigation time and lower probability of success. These findings demonstrate for the first time that MT agent navigation difficulty is strongly influenced by vascular geometry. The proposed automated pipeline enables objective and quantitative characterization of vascular features, providing a foundation for future development of standardized complexity grading and RL model evaluation, without aiming to demonstrate clinically generalizable autonomous navigation.
Han-Ru Wu, Harry Robertshaw, Lisa Dwyer-Joyce +2
Department of Medical Imaging Science National Taiwan University Hospital Taiwan · Surgical & Interventional Engineering School of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences Kings College London UK · Chelsea & Westminster Hospital UK