Literature DB >> 17088929

Technology insight: telementoring and telesurgery in urology.

Ben Challacombe1, Louis Kavoussi, Alexandru Patriciu, Dan Stoianovici, Prokar Dasgupta.   

Abstract

The rapid expansion of the field of minimally invasive surgery has been accompanied by a number of controversies. These novel surgical techniques offer benefits to the patient with regard to length of hospital stay, return to full activity, and cosmesis; also, they are often more cost-effective than open procedures. On the other hand, they are technically demanding, have a significant learning curve, and can be associated with high initial complication rates unless performed by experienced endoscopic surgeons. Telemedicine, which uses real-time video and information transfer, offers the potential to increase the availability of minimally invasive surgery through video-assisted surgery and through remote instruction. At present, remote communities, especially those within developed countries, can most immediately benefit from telesurgical approaches. Enthusiasm must be tempered by the issues of cost, security, surgeon liability and availability of the technology itself which have yet to be fully resolved. In this Review, the field of telemedicine, focusing specifically on telementoring and telesurgery, and its relevance to urology are discussed. From early experimental work to current clinical usage, the advantages of and problems in this evolving field are explored.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17088929     DOI: 10.1038/ncpuro0626

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nat Clin Pract Urol        ISSN: 1743-4270


  9 in total

1.  Telementoring: an Overview and Our Preliminary Experience in the Setting Up of a Cost-effective Telementoring Facility.

Authors:  Suresh Singh; Vivekanand Sharma; Pinakin Patel; Gajendra Anuragi; Raj Govind Sharma
Journal:  Indian J Surg       Date:  2016-01-11       Impact factor: 0.656

2.  Western Trauma Association critical decisions in trauma: Preferred triage and initial management of the burned patient.

Authors:  Gary A Vercruysse; Hasan B Alam; Matthew J Martin; Karen Brasel; Eugene E Moore; Carlos V Brown; Amanda Bettencourt; John Schulz; Tina Palmieri; Linwood Haith; Kenji Inaba
Journal:  J Trauma Acute Care Surg       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 3.313

Review 3.  Surgery in space: the future of robotic telesurgery.

Authors:  Tamás Haidegger; József Sándor; Zoltán Benyó
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-07-22       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Improving access to urologists through an electronic consultation service.

Authors:  Luke Witherspoon; Clare Liddy; Amir Afkham; Erin Keely; John Mahoney
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 1.862

5.  The current status of robotic pelvic surgery: results of a multinational interdisciplinary consensus conference.

Authors:  Steven D Wexner; Roberto Bergamaschi; Antonio Lacy; Jonas Udo; Hans Brölmann; Robin H Kennedy; Hubert John
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-11-27       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Integration of aquablation through telemetry: an alternative to onsite proctoring?

Authors:  Jose M El-Asmar; Muhieddine Labban; Albert El-Hajj
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-02-06       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 7.  The impact of COVID-19 on urology office visits and adoption of telemedicine services.

Authors:  Mohit Butaney; Amarnath Rambhatla
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2022-03-01       Impact factor: 2.309

Review 8.  Robotic urology in the United Kingdom: experience and overview of robotic-assisted cystectomy.

Authors:  Oussama Elhage; Declan Murphy; Ben Challacombe; Peter Rimington; Mohammad S Khan; Prokar Dasgupta
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2008-01-08

Review 9.  Telemedicine and Telementoring in Urology: A Glimpse of the Past and a Leap Into the Future.

Authors:  Christian Habib Ayoub; Jose M El-Asmar; Suhaib Abdulfattah; Albert El-Hajj
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-02-22
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.