Literature DB >> 18071811

Visual clues act as a substitute for haptic feedback in robotic surgery.

M E Hagen1, J J Meehan, I Inan, P Morel.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The lack of haptic feedback (HF) in robotic surgery is one of the major concerns of novice surgeons to that field. The superior visual appearances acquired during robotic surgery may give clues that make HF less important.
METHODS: We surveyed 52 individuals on their perception of HF during robotic surgery. The first group of 34 surgically inexperienced people used the da Vinci robot for their first time (drylab). The second group included 8 laparoscopic surgeons with experience up to a fifth robotic operation. The third group included 10 surgical experts with substantial experience (150-650 robotic cases). Visual analog assessment was made of perception of HF, how much HF was missed, how much the absence of HF impaired the operators' level of comfort. Robotic experts were asked if complications have occurred as a result of a lack of HF.
RESULTS: Of the first group, 50% reported the perception of HF, as did 55% of the second group and 100% of the third group (difference between group 1 and group 3: p < 0.05). The first group missed HF for 6.5; the second group for 4.3, and the third group for 4 (difference between groups 1 and 3: p < 0.05). The surgical experts claimed to have missed HF for 7.2 s when they first started robotic surgery (Difference to now: p < 0.05). The lack of HF caused discomfort for the first group of 4; for the second group of 4,4, and for the third group of 2,6. One complication was reported by the robotic experts as resulting from the lack of HF.
CONCLUSIONS: The data support the conclusion that even beginners quickly experience the perception of HF when performing robotic surgery. With more experience, perception of HF and the level of comfort with robotic surgery increases significantly. This perception of HF makes "real" HF less important and demonstrates that its importance is overestimated by novices in robotic surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18071811     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-007-9683-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  12 in total

1.  Tactile feedback is present during minimally invasive surgery.

Authors:  O S Bholat; R S Haluck; W B Murray; P J Gorman; T M Krummel
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 6.113

2.  The da Vinci telerobotic surgical system: the virtual operative field and telepresence surgery.

Authors:  Garth H Ballantyne; Fred Moll
Journal:  Surg Clin North Am       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 2.741

Review 3.  The PAKY, HERMES, AESOP, ZEUS, and da Vinci robotic systems.

Authors:  Hyung L Kim; Peter Schulam
Journal:  Urol Clin North Am       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 2.241

4.  Force feedback plays a significant role in minimally invasive surgery: results and analysis.

Authors:  Gregory Tholey; Jaydev P Desai; Andres E Castellanos
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 12.969

5.  Effect of sensory substitution on suture-manipulation forces for robotic surgical systems.

Authors:  Masaya Kitagawa; Daniell Dokko; Allison M Okamura; David D Yuh
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 5.209

6.  Robotics and telesurgery--an update on their position in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  J Rassweiler; K C Safi; S Subotic; D Teber; T Frede
Journal:  Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 2.442

7.  Multi-sensory surgical support system incorporating, tactile, visual and auditory perception modalities.

Authors:  Sadao Omata; Yoshinobu Murayama; Christos E Constantinou
Journal:  Stud Health Technol Inform       Date:  2005

8.  Comparison of skill training with robotic systems and traditional endoscopy: implications on training and adoption.

Authors:  Hersh S Maniar; M Laurin Council; Sandip M Prasad; Sunil M Prasad; Celeste Chu; Ralph J Damiano
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2005-01-19       Impact factor: 2.192

9.  A comparison of tactile, auditory, and visual feedback in a pointing task using a mouse-type device.

Authors:  M Akamatsu; I S MacKenzie; T Hasbroucq
Journal:  Ergonomics       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 2.778

Review 10.  Learning curve using robotic surgery.

Authors:  Sanjeev Kaul; Nikhil L Shah; Mani Menon
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 2.862

View more
  19 in total

Review 1.  Robotic surgery for oropharynx cancer: promise, challenges, and future directions.

Authors:  John R de Almeida; Eric M Genden
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 5.075

Review 2.  Current perspectives on laparoscopic robot-assisted pancreas and pancreas-kidney transplantation.

Authors:  Ugo Boggi; Stefano Signori; Fabio Vistoli; Gabriella Amorese; Giovanni Consani; Nelide De Lio; Vittorio Perrone; Chiara Croce; Piero Marchetti; Diego Cantarovich; Franco Mosca
Journal:  Rev Diabet Stud       Date:  2011-05-10

3.  European Association of Endoscopic Surgeons (EAES) consensus statement on the use of robotics in general surgery.

Authors:  Amir Szold; Roberto Bergamaschi; Ivo Broeders; Jenny Dankelman; Antonello Forgione; Thomas Langø; Andreas Melzer; Yoav Mintz; Salvador Morales-Conde; Michael Rhodes; Richard Satava; Chung-Ngai Tang; Ramon Vilallonga
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-11-08       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  In vivo validation of a system for haptic feedback of tool vibrations in robotic surgery.

Authors:  Karlin Bark; William McMahan; Austin Remington; Jamie Gewirtz; Alexei Wedmid; David I Lee; Katherine J Kuchenbecker
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-07-18       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Robotic surgery: current perceptions and the clinical evidence.

Authors:  Arif Ahmad; Zoha F Ahmad; Jared D Carleton; Ashish Agarwala
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-05-18       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Impact of Robotic Surgery on Decision Making: Perspectives of Surgical Teams.

Authors:  Rebecca Randell; Natasha Alvarado; Stephanie Honey; Joanne Greenhalgh; Peter Gardner; Arron Gill; David Jayne; Alwyn Kotze; Alan Pearman; Dawn Dowding
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2015-11-05

Review 7.  Prevalence of haptic feedback in robot-mediated surgery: a systematic review of literature.

Authors:  Farshid Amirabdollahian; Salvatore Livatino; Behrad Vahedi; Radhika Gudipati; Patrick Sheen; Shan Gawrie-Mohan; Nikhil Vasdev
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2017-12-01

8.  Surgeons and non-surgeons prefer haptic feedback of instrument vibrations during robotic surgery.

Authors:  Jacqueline K Koehn; Katherine J Kuchenbecker
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-12-25       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 9.  The role for surgical management of HPV-related oropharyngeal carcinoma.

Authors:  Eric M Genden
Journal:  Head Neck Pathol       Date:  2012-07-03

10.  Artificial palpation in robotic surgery using haptic feedback.

Authors:  Ahmad Abiri; Yen-Yi Juo; Anna Tao; Syed J Askari; Jake Pensa; James W Bisley; Erik P Dutson; Warren S Grundfest
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-09-05       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.