Abstract
Robotic surgery has become an established part of clinical surgery. The advantages of using a robot have been enumerated by many clinicians, however the true potential has yet to be realized. In addition, the systems available today are extraordinarily simple and cumbersome relative to the more sophisticated robotic systems used in other industries. However more important is the fact that the fundamental principles underlying robotics have yet to be exploited, such as systems integration, feedback control, automatic performance, simulation and rehearsal and integration into healthcare enterprise. By looking at robotic implementation in other industries, and exploring the new robotic technologies in the laboratories, it is possible to speculate on the future directions which would be possible in surgical robotics.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Garcia, P., Rosen, J., Kapoor, C., Noakes, M., Elbert, G., Treat, M., Ganous, T., Hanson, M., Manak, J., Hasser, C., Rohler, D., Satava, R.: Trauma pod: a semi-automated telerobotic surgical system. Int. J. Med. Robot. 5(2), 136–146 (2009)
Rosen, J., Brown, J.D., Chang, L., Sinanan, M., Hannaford, B.: Generalized approach for modeling minimally invasive surgery as a stochastic process using a discrete markov model. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 53(3), 399–413 (2006) [JP 9]
Mutter, D., Dallemagne, B., Bailey, C., Soler, L., Marescaux, J.: 3-D virtual reality and selective vascular control for laparoscopic left hepatic lobectomy. Surg. Endos. 23, 432–435 (2009)
Kahol, K., Satava, R.M., Ferrara, J., Smith, M.L.: Effect of short-term pretrial practice on surgical proficiency in simulated environments: a randomized trial of the “preoperative warm-up” effect. J. Am. Coll. Surg. 208(2), 255–268 (2009)
De, S., Rosen, J., Dagan, A.,Swanson, P., Sinanan, M.,Hannaford, B.: Assessment of tissue damage due to mechanical stresses. Int. J. Robot. Res. 26(11–12), 1159–1171 (2007)
Vaezy, S., Martin, R., Keilman, G., Kaczkowski, P., Chi, E., Yazaji, E., Caps, M., Poliachik, S., Carter, S., Sharar, S., Cornejo, C., Crum, L.: Control of splenic bleeding by using high intensity ultrasound. J. Trauma. 47(3), 521–525 (1999)
Knorz, M.C., Jendritza, B.: Topographically-guided laser in situ keratomileusis to treat corneal irregularities. Ophthalmology 107(6), 1138–1143 (2000)
Joseph J.V,., Oleynikov, D., Rentschler, M., Dumpert, J., Patel, H.R.: Microrobot assisted laparoscopic urological surgery in a canine model. J. Urol. 180(5), 2202–2205 (2008)
Iddan, G., Meron, G., Glukhovsky, A., Swain, P.: Wireless capsule endoscopy. Nature. 405(6785), 417 (2000)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Satava, R.M. (2011). Future Directions in Robotic Surgery. In: Rosen, J., Hannaford, B., Satava, R. (eds) Surgical Robotics. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1126-1_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1126-1_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-1125-4
Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-1126-1
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)