Literature DB >> 19517180

Initial trial of a stereoscopic, insertable, remotely controlled camera for minimal access surgery.

Dennis L Fowler1, Tie Hu, Tejas Nadkarni, Peter K Allen, Nancy J Hogle.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although video-laparoscopy has enabled successful minimal access surgery, the nature of the technology causes many troublesome limitations: (1) the fulcrum effect of the insertion site through the abdominal wall limits the angle of view, (2) the camera operator must use counterintuitive movements, (3) the laparoscope occupies an incision which otherwise could be used for an instrument, and (4) the laparoscope provides a two-dimensional image.
METHODS: A stereoscopic, insertable, remotely controlled camera was developed to overcome the limitations imposed by traditional video-laparoscopy. Additional functionality included digital zoom, picture-in-picture (PIP), and tracking capability for autonomous function of the camera. Four surgical tasks were performed twice in a porcine model, once using the insertable camera and once using a standard video-laparoscope setup for visualization. Running the bowel, simulated laparoscopic appendectomy, laparoscopic nephrectomy, and laparoscopic suturing and tying were measured for time, blood loss, and complications. Digital zoom, PIP, and the ability of the computer to move the camera to track a marked instrument were subjectively evaluated.
RESULTS: The tasks were aborted in one animal because a new three-dimensional (3D) display could not be synchronized with the camera and in another animal because a motor in the camera failed. The tasks were all completed twice in two animals. The mean time was less for all procedures using the insertable camera. There was no significant blood loss and there were no complications. Digital zoom and PIP displaying both a close-up and a panoramic view were subjectively felt to improve visualization by all observers. The computer could reliably move the camera to track a marked instrument to keep it in the center of the field of view.
CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary proof-of-concept study suggests that a stereoscopic, insertable, remotely controlled camera may provide better visualization during minimal access surgery by overcoming many of the limitations of video-laparoscopy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19517180     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-009-0541-0

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


  17 in total

1.  In-vivo stereoscopic imaging system with 5 degrees-of-freedom for minimal access surgery.

Authors:  Andrew Miller; Peter Allen; Dennis Fowler
Journal:  Stud Health Technol Inform       Date:  2004

Review 2.  Endoluminal minirobots for transgastric peritoneoscopy.

Authors:  Amy C Lehman; Mark E Rentschler; Shane M Farritor; Dmitry Oleynikov
Journal:  Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 2.442

3.  Impact of 2D and 3D vision on performance of novice subjects using da Vinci robotic system.

Authors:  A Blavier; Q Gaudissart; G B Cadière; A S Nyssen
Journal:  Acta Chir Belg       Date:  2006 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.090

Review 4.  Recent in vivo surgical robot and mechanism developments.

Authors:  M E Rentschler; D Oleynikov
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-05-19       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Natural orifice cholecystectomy using a miniature robot.

Authors:  Amy C Lehman; Jason Dumpert; Nathan A Wood; Lee Redden; Abigail Q Visty; Shane Farritor; Brandon Varnell; Dmitry Oleynikov
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-12-05       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 6.  Robotic surgery.

Authors:  Dmitry Oleynikov
Journal:  Surg Clin North Am       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 2.741

7.  In vivo pan/tilt endoscope with integrated light source, zoom and auto-focusing.

Authors:  Tie Hu; Peter K Allen; Roger Goldman; Nancy J Hogle; Dennis L Fowler
Journal:  Stud Health Technol Inform       Date:  2008

8.  In vivo robotics for natural orifice transgastric peritoneoscopy.

Authors:  Amy C Lehman; Jason Dumpert; Nathan A Wood; Abigail Q Visty; Shane M Farritor; Dmitry Oleynikov
Journal:  Stud Health Technol Inform       Date:  2008

9.  Microrobot assisted laparoscopic urological surgery in a canine model.

Authors:  Jean V Joseph; Dimitry Oleynikov; Mark Rentschler; Jason Dumpert; Hitendra R H Patel
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2008-09-20       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  Comparison of two-dimensional and three-dimensional suturing: is there a difference in a robotic surgery setting?

Authors:  Ketan K Badani; Akshay Bhandari; Ashutosh Tewari; Mani Menon
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 2.942

View more
  3 in total

1.  s-CAM: An Untethered Insertable Laparoscopic Surgical Camera Robot with Non-Contact Actuation.

Authors:  Ning Li; Hui Liu; Reza Yazdanpanah Abdolmalaki; Gregory J Mancini; Jindong Tan
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-29       Impact factor: 3.847

2.  Secured independent tools in peritoneoscopy.

Authors:  Daniel A Tsin; Fausto Davila; Guillermo Dominguez; Panagiotis Manolas
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2010 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.172

Review 3.  Utilizing Light-field Imaging Technology in Neurosurgery.

Authors:  Brian R Chen; Ian A Buchanan; Spencer Kellis; Daniel Kramer; Ifije Ohiorhenuan; Zack Blumenfeld; Dominic J Grisafe Ii; Michael F Barbaro; Angad S Gogia; James Y Lu; Beverly B Chen; Brian Lee
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2018-04-10
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.