Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Future of Telerobotic Surgery

  • Chapter
Robotic Urologic Surgery

Abstract

The confluence of minimally invasive surgery, integrated operating rooms, and telerobotic surgery promises substantial advances for all types of surgery in the 21st century. Laparoscopic approaches to minimally invasive surgery have won dramatic gains for patients in terms of short-term outcomes. Integrated laparoscopic operating rooms insert teleconferencing capabilities into surgical suites and offer easy access to telementoring for inexperienced surgeons during the steep learning curves of many advanced minimally invasive surgical procedures. The rapid evolution of robot-assisted surgery into telerobotic surgery provides technologic solutions to many of the inherent limitations of laparoscopic surgery. Moreover, the surgeon’s console of telerobotic surgical systems provides a platform for integration in novel formats of the varied forms of digital information currently generated for surgical patients.

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 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ballantyne GH. Granting clinical privileges for telerobotic surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percut Tech 2002;12:17–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Doarn CR. Telemedicine in tomorrow’s operating room: a natural fit. Semin Laparosc Surg 2003;10: 121–126.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Rosser JC, Wood M, Payne JH, et al. Telementoring. A practical option in surgical training. Surg Endosc 1997;11:852–855.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Lee BR, Bishoff JT, Janetschek G, et al. A novel method of surgical instruction: international telementoring. World J Urol 1998;16:367–370.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Lee BR, Caddedu JA, Janetschek G, et al. International surgical telementoring: our initial experience. Stud Health Technol Inform 1998;50: 41–47.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Cubano M, Poulose BK, Talamini MA, et al. Long distance telementoring. A novel tool for laparoscopy aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln. Surg Endosc 1999;13:673–678.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Byrne JP, Mughal MM. Telementoring as an adjunct to training and competence-based assessment in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 2000;14:1159–1161.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Bruschi M, Micali S, Porpiglia F, et al. Laparoscopic telementored adrenalectomy: the Italian experience. Surg Endosc 2005;19:836–840.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Schneider A, Wilhelm D, Bohn U, et al. An evaluation of a surgical telepresence system for an intrahospital local area network. J Telemed Telecare 2005;11:408–413.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Mullaney TJ, Weintraub A. The digital hospital: how info tech saves lives and money at one medical center. Is this the future of health care? Business Week: 2005:77–84.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ellison LM, Pinto PA, Kim F, et al. Telerounding and patient satisfaction after surgery. J Am Coll Surg 2004;199:523–530.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Smith CD, Skandalakis JE. Remote presence proctoring by using a wireless remote-control videoconferencing system. Surg Innov2005;12:139–143.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Satava RM, Simon IB. Teleoperation, telerobotics, and telepresence in Surgery. Endosc Surg 1993;1: 151–153.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Green PE, Piantanida TA, Hill JW, et al. Telepresence: dexterous procedures in a virtual operating field [abstract]. Am Surg 1991;57:192.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Jensen JF, Hill JW. Advanced telepresence surgery system development. Stud Health Technol Inform 1996;29:107–117.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Satava RM. Virtual reality and telerpresence for military medicine. Ann Acad Med Singapore 1997;26:118–120.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Satava RM. Surgical robotics: the early chronicles: a personal historical perspective. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percut Tech 2002;12:6–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Satava RM. Robotic surgery: from past to future —a personal journey. Surg Clin North Am 2003;83:1491–1500.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Bowersox JC, Cordts PR, LaPorta AJ. Use of an intuitive telemanipulator system for remote trauma surgery: an experimental study. J Am Coll Surg 1998;186:615–621.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Ewing DR, Pigazzi A, Wang Y, Ballantyne GH. Robots in the operating room — the history. Semin Laparosc Surg 2004;11:63–71.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ballantyne GH, Moll F. The da Vinci telerobotic surgical system: the virtual operative field and telepresence surgery. Surg Clin North Am 2003;83:1293–1304.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Marescaux J, Leroy J, Gagner M, et al. Transatlantic robot-assisted telesurgery. Nature 2001;413: 379–380.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Marescaux J, Leroy J, Rubino F, et al. Transcontinental robot-assisted remote telesurgery: feasibility and potential applications. Ann Surg 2002;235: 487–492.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Larkin M. Transatlantic, robot-assisted telesurgery deemed a success. Lancet 2001;358:1074.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Anvari M. Robot-assisted remote telepresence surgery. Semin Laparosc Surg 2004;11:123–128.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Sebajang H, Trudeau P, Dougall A, et al. Telementoring: an important enabling tool for the community surgeon. Surg Innov 2005;12:327–331.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. 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: 460–464.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Satava RM. Transitioning to the furure. J Am Coll Surg 1998;186:691–692.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Satava RM. Telepresence for the laparoscopic surgeon. In: Zucker KA, ed. Surgical Laparoscopy. New York: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2001: 797–802.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Herron DM, Gagner M, Kenyon TL, Swanstrom LL. The minimally invasive surgical suite enters the 21st century. A discussion of critical design elements. Surg Endosc 2001;15:415–422.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Seales WB, Caban J. Visualization trends: applications in the operating room. Semin Laparosc Surg 2003;10:107–114.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Satava RM. The operating room of the future: observations and commentary. Semin Laparosc Surg 2003;10:99–105.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Satava RM. Disruptive visions: a robot is not a machine…systems integration for surgeons. Surg Endosc 2004;18:617–620.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Marescaux J, Soler L. Image-guided robotic surgery. Semin Laparosc Surg 2004;11:113–122.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Marescaux J, Mutter D, Soler L, et al. [The Virtual University applied to telesurgery: from tele-education to tele-manipulation]. Bull Acad Natl Med 1999;183:509–521.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Marescaux J, Soler L, Mutter D, et al. Virtual university applied to telesurgery: from teleeducation to telemanipulation. Stud Health Technol Inform 2000;70:195–201.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Soler L, Delingette H, Malandain G, et al. An automatic virtual patient reconstruction from CTscans for hepatic surgical planning. Stud Health Technol Inform 2000;70:316–322.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Mutter D, Bouras G, Marescaux J. Digital technologies and quality improvement in cancer surgery. Eur J Surg Oncol 2005;31:689–694.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Muller W, Grosskopf S, Hildebrand A, et al. Virtual reality in the operating room of the future. Stud Health Technol Inform 1997;39:224–231.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Marescaux J, Rubino F, Arenas M, et al. Augmented-reality-assisted laparoscopic adrenalectomy. JAMA 2004;292:2214–2215.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Le Mer P, Soler L, Pavy D, et al. Argonaute 3D: a real-time cooperative medical planning software on DSL network. Stud Health Technol Inform 2004;98:203–209.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Satava RM. Virtual reality surgical simulator. The first steps. Surg Endosc 1993;7:203–205.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Coleman J, Nduka CC, Darzi A. Virtual reality and laparoscopic surgery. Br J Surg 1994;81: 1709–1711.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Marescaux J, Clement JM, Tassetti V, et al. Virtual reality applied to hepatic surgery simulation: the next revolution. Ann Surg 1998;228:627–634.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Krummel TM. Surgical simulation and virtual reality: the coming revolution. Ann Surg 1998;228: 635–637.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. O’Toole RV, Playter RR, Krummel TM, et al. Measuring and developing suturing technique with a virtual reality surgical simulator. J Am Coll Surg 1999;189:114–127.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Gorman PJ, Meier AH, Krummel TM. Simulation and virtual reality in surgical education: real or unreal? Arch Surg 1999;134:1203–1208.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Chaudhry A, Sutton C, Wood J, et al. Learning rate for laparoscopic surgical skills on MIST VR, a virtual reality simulator: quality of human-computer interface. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1999;81:281–286.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Satava RM. Accomplishments and challenges of surgical simulation. Surg Endosc 2001;15:232–234.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Bansal VK, White AP. Virtual systems for simulated surgical resident training. In: Ballantyne GH, Marescaux J, Giulianotti PC, eds. Primer of Robotic & Telerobotic Surgery. New York: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2004:237–242.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Sweet R, Porter J, Oppenheimer P, et al. Simulation of bleeding in endoscopic procedures using virtual reality. J Endourol 2002;16:451–455.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Sweet R, Kowalewski T, Oppenheimer P, et al. Face, content and construct validity of the University of Washington virtual reality transurethral prostate resection trainer. J Urol 2004;172:1953–1957.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Kallstrom R, Hjertberg H, Kjolhede H, Svanvik J. Use of a virtual reality, real-time, simulation model for the training of urologists in transurethral resection of the prostate. Scand J Urol Nephrol 2005;39:313–320.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Johnson DB, Kondraske GV, Wilhelm DM, et al. Assessment of basic human performance resources predicts the performance of virtual ureterorenoscopy. J Urol 2004;171:80–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Jacomides L, Ogan K, Cadeddu JA, Pearle MS. Use of a virtual reality simulator for ureteroscopy training. J Urol 2004;171:320–323.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Ogan K, Jacomides L, Shulman MJ, et al. Virtual ureteroscopy predicts ureteroscopic proficiency of medical students on a cadaver. J Urol 2004;172: 667–671.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Knoll T, Trojan L, Haecker A, et al. Validation of computer-based training in ureterorenoscopy. BJU Int 2005;95:1276–1279.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Torkington J, Smith SG, Rees BI, Darzi A. The role of simulation in surgical training. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2000;82:88–94.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Gallagher AG, Ritter EM, Champion H, et al. Virtual reality simulation for the operating room: proficiency-based training as a paradigm shift in surgical skills training. Ann Surg 2005;241: 364–372.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Schijven MP, Jakimowicz JJ, Broeders IA, Tseng LN. The Eindhoven laparoscopic cholecystectomy training course —improving operating room performance using virtual reality training: results from the first E.A.E.S. accredited virtual reality trainings curriculum. Surg Endosc 2005;19: 1220–1226.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Aggarwal R, Grantcharov T, Moorthy K, et al. A competency-based virtual reality training curriculum for the acquisition of laparoscopic psychomotor skill. Am J Surg 2006;191: 128–133.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Aggarwal R, Darzi A. Training in laparoscopy — which model to use? Indian J Gastroenterol 2005; 24:95–96.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Hackensack University Medical Centre, Hackensack, NJ, USA

    Garth H. Ballantyne MD, FACS, FASCRS

Authors
  1. Garth H. Ballantyne MD, FACS, FASCRS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Robotic and Computer-Assisted Surgery and for Robotic and Minimally Invasive Urologic Surgery, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA

    Vipul R. Patel MD (Director, Associate Clinical Professor of Surgery and Associate Professor of Bioinformatics) (Director, Associate Clinical Professor of Surgery and Associate Professor of Bioinformatics)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer-Verlag London Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ballantyne, G.H. (2007). The Future of Telerobotic Surgery. In: Patel, V.R. (eds) Robotic Urologic Surgery. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-704-6_27

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-704-6_27

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-84628-545-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-84628-704-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation