Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Telemedicine network latency management system in 5G telesurgery: a feasibility and effectiveness study

  • Dynamic Manuscript
  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 02 February 2024

This article has been updated

Abstract

Background

Network latency is the most important factor affecting the performance of telemedicine. The aim of the study is to assess the feasibility and efficacy of a novel network latency management system in 5G telesurgery.

Methods

We conducted 20 telesurgery simulation trials (hitching rings to columns) and 15 remote adrenalectomy procedures in the 5G network environment. Telemedicine Network Latency Management System and the traditional "Ping command" method (gold standard) were used to monitor network latency during preoperative simulated telesurgery and formal telesurgery. We observed the working status of the Telemedicine Network Latency Management System and calculated the difference between the network latency data and packet loss rate detected by the two methods. In addition, due to the lower latency of the 5G network, we tested the alert function of the system using the 4G network with relatively high network latency.

Results

The Telemedicine Network Latency Management System showed no instability during telesurgery simulation trials and formal telesurgery. After 20 telesurgery simulation trials and 15 remote adrenalectomy procedures, the p-value for the difference between the network latency data monitored by the Telemedicine Network Latency Management System and the "Ping command" method was greater than 0.05 in each case. Meanwhile, the surgeons reported that the Telemedicine Network Latency Management System had a friendly interface and was easy to operate. Besides, when the network latency exceeded a set threshold, a rapid alarm sounded in the system.

Conclusion

The Telemedicine Network Latency Management System was simple and easy to operate, and it was feasible and effective to use it to monitor network latency in telesurgery. The system had an intuitive and concise interface, and its alarm function increased the safety of telesurgery. The system's own multidimensional working ability and information storage capacity will be more suitable for telemedicine work.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

References

  1. Marescaux J et al (2001) Transatlantic robot-assisted telesurgery. Nature 413(6854):379–380

    Article  CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  2. Nguan C, Miller B, Patel R et al (2008) Pre-clinical remote telesurgery trial of a da Vinci telesurgery prototype. Int J Med Robot 4(4):304–309

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sterbis JR, Hanly EJ, Herman BC et al (2008) Transcontinental telesurgical nephrectomy using the da Vinci robot in a porcine model. Urology 71(5):971–973

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hung AJ, Chen J, Shah A et al (2018) Telementoring and telesurgery for minimally invasive procedures. J Urol 199(2):355–369

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Jin ML, Brown MM, Patwa D et al (2021) Telemedicine, telementoring, and telesurgery for surgical practices. Curr Probl Surg 58(12):100986

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Xia SB, Lu QS (2021) Development status of telesurgery robotic system. Chin J Traumatol 24(3):144–147

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Perez M, Xu S, Chauhan S et al (2016) Impact of delay on telesurgical performance: study on the robotic simulator dV-Trainer. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 11(4):581–587

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Xu S, Perez M, Yang K et al (2014) Determination of the latency effects on surgical performance and the acceptable latency levels in telesurgery using the dV-Trainer((R)) simulator. Surg Endosc 28(9):2569–2576

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Zheng J, Wang Y, Zhang J et al (2020) 5G ultra-remote robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery in China. Surg Endosc 34(11):5172–5180

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Yi B et al (2016) The first clinical use of domestically produced Chinese minimally invasive surgical robot system “MicroHand S.” Surg Endosc 30(6):2649–2655

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Yi B et al (2017) Domestically produced Chinese minimally invasive surgical robot system “MicroHand S” is applied to clinical surgery preliminarily in China. Surg Endosc 31(1):487–493

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Li J, Jiao W, Yuan H et al (2022) Telerobot-assisted laparoscopic adrenalectomy: feasibility study. Br J Surg 110:6–9

    Article  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  13. Sachdeva N, Klopukh M, Clair RS, Hahn WE (2021) Using conditional generative adversarial networks to reduce the effects of latency in robotic telesurgery. J Robot Surg 15(4):635–641

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Madder RD, VanOosterhout S, Mulder A et al (2020) Network latency and long-distance robotic telestenting: exploring the potential impact of network delays on telestenting performance. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 95(5):914–919

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Barba P, Stramiello J, Funk EK et al (2022) Remote telesurgery in humans: a systematic review. Surg Endosc 36(5):2771–2777

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Li J et al (2023) Application of improved robot-assisted laparoscopic telesurgery with 5G technology in urology. Eur Urol 83(1):41–44

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lu ES, Reppucci VS, Houston SKS 3rd et al (2021) Three-dimensional telesurgery and remote proctoring over a 5G network. Digit J Ophthalmol 27(3):38–43

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Mohan A, Wara UU, Arshad Shaikh MT et al (2021) Telesurgery and robotics: an improved and efficient era. Cureus 13(3):e14124

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (52122501), Major Scientific and Technological Innovation Project of Shandong Province (2019JZZY021002), Taishan Scholar Program of Shandong Province (tsqn20221165), and Qingdao People’s Life Science and Technology Project (18-6-1-64-nsh).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Chengjun Li, Jilu Zheng and Xin Zhang are co-first authors.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, 266000, China

    Chengjun Li, Jilu Zheng, Lei Luo, Guangdi Chu, Zhao Zhang, Haiyun Wang, Fei Qin, Guanzhi Zhou, Wei Jiao, Yonghua Wang, Xuecheng Yang & Haitao Niu

  2. School of Mechanical Engineering, Tianjin University, Tianjin, 300000, China

    Xin Zhang, Jianchang Zhao, Zhilong Zhou, Dejun Yang, Hao Guo, Ce Zhang & Jianmin Li

Authors
  1. Chengjun Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jilu Zheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xin Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lei Luo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Guangdi Chu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jianchang Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Zhao Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Haiyun Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Fei Qin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Guanzhi Zhou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Wei Jiao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Yonghua Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Xuecheng Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Zhilong Zhou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Dejun Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Hao Guo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Ce Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. Jianmin Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  19. Haitao Niu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

HN designed the research; LL, WJ, HY, and CX assisted the telesurgeries; JD, HG, YH, and ZG collected the data; LJ, JC, ZZ, CZ, and LZ analyzed the data; LJ and JC wrote the manuscript; DG, FQ, CJ, MJ, XZ, and HN edited the manuscript; all authors reviewed and approved the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Jianmin Li or Haitao Niu.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

Jilu Zheng, Chengjun Li, Lei Luo, Guangdi Chu, Jianchang Zhao, Zhao Zhang, Haiyun Wang, Fei Qin, Guanzhi Zhou, Jianmin Li, Wei Jiao, Yonghua Wang, Xuecheng Yang, Zhilong Zhou, Dejun Yang, Hao Guo, Ce Zhang, Xin Zhang and Haitao Niu declare that they have no conflict of interests to disclose.

Ethical approval

The telesurgery was ratified by the Ethics Boards of all hospitals and was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04804163). Written informed consent was signed by all patients. We didn’t encounter significant intraoperative hemorrhage or robot breakdown, but we were prepared to convert to standard laparoscopic surgery or open surgery to ensure safety, if needed.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The original online version of this article was revised due to a retrospective Open Access cancellation.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Electronic supplementary material 1 (DOCX 18 kb)

Electronic supplementary material 2 (MP4 3063 kb)

Electronic supplementary material 3 (MP4 10521 kb)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, C., Zheng, J., Zhang, X. et al. Telemedicine network latency management system in 5G telesurgery: a feasibility and effectiveness study. Surg Endosc 38, 1592–1599 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-023-10585-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-023-10585-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation