Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Telementoring for Minimally Invasive Surgery

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Digital Surgery

Abstract

As healthcare evolves in an increasingly connected world, there is a growing interest in the potential synergy between telemedicine and minimally invasive surgery. The development of digital surgery and introduction of new technologies have resulted in new and efficient ways to train and monitor the surgeon’s performance. Robotic surgery provides an ideal environment for surgical telementoring and telesurgery given its endoscopic optics and mechanized instrument movement. We review the present status, current challenges, and future promise of telemedicine in minimally invasive surgery with a focus on urological applications. The authors reviewed current published literature on PubMed®, Scopus®, and Web of Science® databases for full-text English language articles published between 1995 and 2019 using the key words “telemedicine,” “minimally invasive surgical procedure,” “robotic surgical procedure,” “education,” and “distance.” Publications were categorized into four advancing levels, i.e., verbal guidance, guidance with telestration, guidance with tele-assist, and telesurgery.

We conclude that more advanced levels of surgical telementoring provide more effective and experiential teaching but are associated with increased telecommunication network bandwidth requirements, expenses, and potential legal implications. Telementoring in robotic surgery is becoming an increasingly practical and cost-effective option in facilitating teaching of advanced surgical skills worldwide and delivery of surgical care to underserved areas. However, significant challenges remain. Realization of the potential of telementoring depends on addressing ethical issues, financial incentives, and legislation as well as collaboration with cybersecurity experts to ensure safety and cost-effectiveness.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Guljas R, Ahmed A, Chang K, et al. Impact of telemedicine in managing type 1 diabetes among school-age children and adolescents: an integrative review. J Pediatr Nurs. 2014;29(3):198–204.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Eadie L, Seifalian A, Davidson B. Telemedicine in surgery. Br J Surg. 2003;90(6):647–58.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Weinstein R, Lopez A, Joseph B, et al. Telemedicine, telehealth, and mobile health applications that work: opportunities and barriers. Am J Med. 2014;127(3):183–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Mars M. Telemedicine and advances in urban and rural healthcare delivery in Africa. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2013;56(3):326–35.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Challacombe B, Kandaswamy R, Dasgupta P, Mamode N. Telementoring facilitates independent hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy. Transplant Proc. 2005;37:613–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Pahlsson HI, Groth K, Permert J, et al. Telemedicine: an important aid to perform high-quality endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in low-volume centers. Endoscopy. 2013;45:357–61.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Collins JW, Sooriakumaran P, Wiklund NP. Launching and evolving a robotic cystectomy service by developing your ‘FORTE’. BJU Int. 2014;113(4):520–2.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Collins J, Akre O, Challacombe B, Karim O, Wiklund P. Robotic networks: delivering empowerment through integration. BJU Int. 2015;116(2):167–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Corliss WR, Johnson EG. Teleoperators and human augmentation. An AEC-NASA technology survey. Washington, DC: Office of Technology Utilization, National Aeronautics and Space Administration; 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Paul HA, Bargar WL, Mittlestadt B, et al. Development of a surgical robot for cementless total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1992;285:57–66.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Davies BL, Ng W, Hibberd RD. Prostatic resection: an example of safe robotic surgery. Robotica. 1993;11:561–6.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Satava RM. Robotic surgery: from past to future: a personal journey. Surg Clin North Am. 2003;83:1491–500.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. George EI, Brand TC, LaPorta A, Marescaux J, Satava RM. Origins of robotic surgery: from skepticism to standard of care. JSLS. 2018;22(4):e2018.00039.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Marescaux J, Leroy J, Gagner M, et al. Transatlantic robot-assisted telesurgery. Nature. 2001;413(6854):379–80.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Marescaux J, Leroy J, Rubino F, Vix M, Simone M, Mutter D. Transcontinental robot assisted remote telesurgery: feasibility and potential applications. Ann Surg. 2002;235:487–92.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Anvari M. Remote telepresence surgery: the Canadian experience. Surg Endosc. 2007;21:537–41.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Anvari M, McKinley C, Stein H. Establishment of the world’s first telerobotic remote surgical service: for provision of advanced laparoscopic surgery in a rural community. Ann Surg. 2005;241:460–4.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Anvari M. Reaching the rural world through robotic surgical programs. Eur Surg. 2005;37:284–92.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Anvari M. Telesurgery: remote knowledge translation in clinical surgery. World J Surg. 2007;31:1545–50.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Anvari M. Robot-assisted remote telepresence surgery. Semin Laparosc Surg. 2004;11:123–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Anvari M, Broderick T, Stein H, et al. The impact of latency on surgical precision and task completion during robotic-assisted remote telepresence surgery. Comput Aided Surg. 2005;10:93–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. https://www.scmp.com/video/china/2181656/china-completes-worlds-first-5g-remote-surgery-test-animal.

  23. Shin D, Dalag L, Azhar R, et al. A novel interface for the telementoring of robotic surgery. BJU Int. 2015;116(2):302–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Lacy AM, Bravo R, Otero-Piñeiro AM, Pena R, De Lacy FB, Menchaca R, et al. 5G-assisted telementored surgery. Br J Surg. 2019;106:1576–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.11364.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Collins JW, Verhagen H, Mottrie A, Wiklund PN. Application and integration of live streaming from leading robotic centres can enhance surgical education. Eur Urol. 2015;68(5):747–9.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Bogen EM, Schlachta CM, Ponsky T. White paper: technology for surgical telementoring-SAGES Project 6 Technology Working Group. Surg Endosc. 2019;33:684–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-06631-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hassan A, Ghafoor M, Tariq SA, Zia T, Ahmad W. High efficiency video coding (HEVC)-based surgical telementoring system using shallow convolutional neural network. J Digit Imaging. 2019;32:1027–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-019-00206-2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Gambadauro P, Magos A. NEST (network enhanced surgical training): a PC-based system for telementoring in gynecological surgery. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2008;139(2):222–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Sebajang H, Trudeau P, Dougall A, et al. Telementoring: an important enabling tool for the community surgeon. Surg Innov. 2005;12(4):327–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Treter S, Perrier N, Sosa JA, et al. Telementoring: a multi-institutional experience with the introduction of a novel surgical approach for adrenalectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20(8):2754–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Clifford TG, Dajani D, Khooshabeh P, Hwang E, Desai MM, Gill IS, et al. MP23-18 inter-hospital telementoring for robotic surgery. J Urol. 2016;195(4S): e268-e269. https://www.auajournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1016/j.juro.2016.02.740.

  32. Di Valentino M, Alerci M, Bogen M, et al. Telementoring during endovascular treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms: a prospective study. J Endovasc Ther. 2005;12(2):200–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Agarwal R, Levinson A, Allaf M, et al. The RoboConsultant: telementoring and remote presence in the operating room during minimally invasive urologic surgeries using a novel mobile robotic interface. Urology. 2007;70(5):970–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Rothenberg S, Yoder S, Kay S, et al. Initial experience with surgical telementoring in pediatric laparoscopic surgery using remote presence technology. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2009;19(Suppl 1):S219–22.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Safir IJ, Shrewsberry AB, Issa IM, Ogan K, Ritenour CWM, Sullivan J, et al. Impact of remote monitoring and supervision on resident training using new ACGME milestone criteria. Can J Urol. 2015;22:7959–64.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Anderson SM, Kapp BB, Angell JM, Abd TT, Thompson NJ, Ritenour CWM, et al. Remote monitoring and supervision of urology residents utilizing integrated endourology suites – a prospective study of patients’ opinions. J Endourol. 2013;27:96–100. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2012.0406.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Schlachta C, Sorsdahl A, Lefebvre K, et al. A model for longitudinal mentoring and telementoring of laparoscopic colon surgery. Surg Endosc. 2009;23(7):1634–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Bruns NE, Irtan S, Rothenberg SS, et al. Trans-atlantic telementoring with pediatric surgeons: technical considerations and lessons learned. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2016;26:75.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Snyderman CH, Gardner PA, Lanisnik B, et al. Surgical telementoring: a new model for surgical training. Laryngoscope. 2016;126:1334.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Forgione A, Kislov V, Guraya SY, et al. Safe introduction of laparoscopic colorectal surgery even in remote areas of the world: the value of a comprehensive telementoring training program. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2015;25:37.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Ponsky TA, Bobanga ID, Schwachter M, et al. Transcontinental telementoring with pediatric surgeons: proof of concept and technical considerations. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2014;24:892.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Bruschi M, Micali S, Porpiglia F, et al. Laparoscopic telementored adrenalectomy: the Italian experience. Surg Endosc. 2005;19(6):836–40.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Hinata N, Miyake H, Kurahashi T, et al. Novel telementoring system for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: impact on the learning curve. Urology. 2014;83(5):1088–92.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Fuertes-Guiró F, Vitali-Erion E, Rodriguez-Franco A. A program of telementoring in laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2016;25:8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Meijer HAW, Sánchez Margallo JA, Sánchez Margallo FM, et al. Wearable technology in an international telementoring setting during surgery: a feasibility study. BMJ Innov. 2017;3:189–95.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Ali M, Loggins J, Fuller W, et al. 3-D telestration: a teaching tool for robotic surgery. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2008;18(1):107–12.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Jarc A, Shah S, Adebar T, et al. Beyond 2D telestration: an evaluation of novel proctoring tools for robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery. J Robot Surg. 2016;10(2):103–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Jarc A, Stanley A, Clifford T, et al. Proctors exploit three-dimensional ghost tools during clinical-like training scenarios: a preliminary study. World J Urol. 2017;35(6):957–65.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Mendez I, Hill R, Clarke D, et al. Robotic long-distance telementoring in neurosurgery. Neurosurgery. 2005;56(3):434–40.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Rafiq A, Moore JA, Zhao X, et al. Digital video capture and synchronous consultation in open surgery. Ann Surg. 2004;239(4):567–73.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Rodrigues Netto N, Mitre A, Lima S, et al. Telementoring between Brazil and the United States: initial experience. J Endourol. 2003;17(4):217–20.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Bauer J, Lee B, Bishoff J, et al. International surgical telementoring using a robotic arm: our experience. Telemed J. 2000;6(1):25–31.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Micali S, Virgili G, Vannozzi E, et al. Feasibility of telementoring between Baltimore (USA) and Rome (Italy): the first five cases. J Endourol. 2000;14(6):493–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Bove P, Stoianovici D, Micali S, et al. Is telesurgery a new reality? Our experience with laparoscopic and percutaneous procedures. J Endourol. 2003;17(3):137–42.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Sebajang H, Trudeau P, Dougall A, et al. The role of telementoring and telerobotic assistance in the provision of laparoscopic colorectal surgery in rural areas. Surg Endosc. 2006;20(9):1389–93.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Bauer J, Lee BR, Stoianovici D, Bishoff JT, Micali S, Micali F, et al. Remote percutaneous renal access using a new automated telesurgical robotic system. Telemed J E Health. 2001;7:341–6. https://doi.org/10.1089/15305620152814746.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Andersen DS, Cabrera ME, Rojas-Muñoz EJ, et al. Augmented reality future step visualization for robust surgical telementoring. Simul Healthc. 2019;14(1):59–66. https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000334.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Panait L, Rafiq A, Tomulescu V, Boanca C, Popescu I, Carbonell A, et al. Telementoring versus on-site mentoring in virtual reality-based surgical training. Surg Endosc. 2006;20:113–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-005-0113-x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Bilgic E, Turkdogan S, Watanabe Y, Madani A, Landry T, Lavigne D, et al. Effectiveness of telementoring in surgery compared with on-site mentoring: a systematic review. Surg Innov. 2017;24:379–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/1553350617708725.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Byrne JP, Mughal MM. Telementoring as an adjunct to training and competence-based assessment in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc. 2000;14:1159–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004640000264.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Cubano M, Poulose BK, Talamini MA, Stewart R, Antosek LE, Lentz R, et al. Long distance telementoring. A novel tool for laparoscopy aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln. Surg Endosc. 1999;13:673–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004649901071.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Rogers FB, Ricci M, Caputo M, Shackford S, Sartorelli K, Callas P, et al. The use of telemedicine for real-time video consultation between trauma center and community hospital in a rural setting improves early trauma care: preliminary results. J Trauma. 2001;51:1037–41. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005373-200112000-00002.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. St Julien J, Perrier ND. Video telementoring to accelerate learning of new surgical techniques. JAMA Surg. 2016;151:671–2. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2016.0054.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. McBain RK, Sousa JL, Rose AJ, Baxi SM, Faherty LJ, Taplin C, et al. Impact of project ECHO models of medical tele-education: a systematic review. J Gen Intern Med. 2019;34:2842–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-019-05291-1.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  65. Schlachta CM, Nguyen NT, Ponsky T, Dunkin B. Project 6 Summit: SAGES telementoring initiative. Surg Endosc, vol. 30, Springer US; 2016, pp. 3665–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-4988-5.

  66. Xu S, Perez M, Yang K, et al. Determination of the latency effects on surgical performance and the acceptable latency levels in telesurgery using the dV-Trainer_ simulator. Surg Endosc. 2014;28:2569.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Bonaci T, Herron J, Yusuf T et al. To make a robot secure: an experimental analysis of cyber security threats against teleoperated surgical robots. 12 May 2015; arXiv: 1504:04339v2 [cs.RO].

    Google Scholar 

  68. Silva E III. The interstate medical licensure compact. J Am Coll Radiol. 2015;12:511.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Federation of State Medical Boards. Interstate medical licensure compact prepares launch of new pathway for multi-state physician licensing. 17 Oct 2016. Available at http://www.fsmb.org/Media/Default/PDF/Publications/IMLCC_Oct2016_meeting.pdf. Accessed 12 June 2014.

  70. Kempen P. The interstate telemedicine compact and the agenda of the Federation of State Medical Boards. J Am Phys Surg. 2015;20:57.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Virginia’s Legislative Information System. 2010 Session: SB 675 Health insurance; mandated coverage for telemedicine services. Available at https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?101+sum+SB675.

  72. Collins JW, Levy J, Stefanidis D et al. Utilising the Delphi process to develop a proficiency-based progression train-the-trainer course for robotic surgery training. Eur Urol. 2019. pii: S0302-2838(19)30001-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.12.044. [Epub ahead of print] Review.

  73. Collins J, Dasgupta P, Kirby R, Gill I. Globalization of surgical expertise without losing the human touch: utilising the network, old and new. BJU Int. 2012;109(8):1129–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Brunckhorst O, Volpe A, van der Poel H, Mottrie A, Ahmed K. Training, simulation, the learning curve, and how to reduce complications in urology. Eur Urol Focus. 2016;2(1):10–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Saied N. Virtual reality and medicine--from the cockpit to the operating room: are we there yet? Mo Med. 2005;102(5):450–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Collins JW, Akre O, Wiklund PN. Re: Walter Artibani, Vincenzo Ficarra, Ben J. Challacombe et al. EAU policy on live surgery events. Eur Urol 2014; 66: 87–97. Eur Urol. 2014;66:e121–2.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Collins JW, Tyritzis S, Nyberg T, et al. Robot-assisted radical cystectomy – description of an evolved approach to radical cystectomy. Eur Urol. 2013;64:654–63.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, University College London Hospitals NHS, London, UK

    Justin W. Collins

  2. Catherine & Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, University of Southern California Institute of Urology, Center for Robotic Simulation & Education, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Runzhuo Ma & Andrew J. Hung

  3. Cardiology and Critical Care, Hôpital Sacré-Coeur de Montréal and Montreal Heart Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Yanick Beaulieu

Authors
  1. Justin W. Collins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Runzhuo Ma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yanick Beaulieu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Andrew J. Hung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Justin W. Collins .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Orlando, FL, USA

    Sam Atallah

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Collins, J.W., Ma, R., Beaulieu, Y., Hung, A.J. (2021). Telementoring for Minimally Invasive Surgery. In: Atallah, S. (eds) Digital Surgery. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49100-0_27

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49100-0_27

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-49099-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-49100-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation