Literature DB >> 8932609

Telementoring of laparoscopic procedures: initial clinical experience.

R G Moore1, J B Adams, A W Partin, S G Docimo, L R Kavoussi.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To assess the feasibility of telementoring, a clinical telepresence system was developed.
METHODS: Telementoring was attempted in 14 advanced and 9 basic urologic laparoscopic procedures. The remote surgeon located in a control room (> 1,000 feet from operating room) supervised an inexperienced surgeon. Mentoring was accomplished with real-time video images, two-way audio communication, a robotic arm used to control the videoendoscope, and a telestrator. The patient outcome, complications, and operative time were assessed and compared to patients undergoing matched procedures in which the experienced surgeon was working side by side with the primary surgeon.
RESULTS: The overall telementoring success rate was 95.6% (22/23 cases) with no increase in complications. Telementoring of a laparoscopic radical nephrectomy failed secondary to improper positioning of the robotic arm. Operative times compared between telementored and traditionally mentored procedures were not statistically different for basic procedures but were longer for advanced cases.
CONCLUSIONS: Telementoring of laparoscopic procedures is safe and feasible. Further clinical studies are needed prior to implementing telementoring in surgical training.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8932609     DOI: 10.1007/bf00188353

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


  15 in total

1.  Preliminary results of a prospective randomized trial of laparoscopic onlay versus conventional inguinal herniorrhaphy.

Authors:  D M Vogt; M J Curet; D E Pitcher; D T Martin; K A Zucker
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 2.565

2.  Telemedicine: fad or future?

Authors: 
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1995-01-14       Impact factor: 79.321

3.  Robotically assisted laparoscopic surgery. From concept to development.

Authors:  J M Sackier; Y Wang
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Telerobotic assisted laparoscopic surgery: initial laboratory and clinical experience.

Authors:  L R Kavoussi; R G Moore; A W Partin; J S Bender; M E Zenilman; R M Satava
Journal:  Urology       Date:  1994-07       Impact factor: 2.649

Review 5.  Delivery of health care to the underserved: potential contributions of telecommunications technology. Consensus conference entitled "Telemedicine and Access to Care.".

Authors:  R McGee; E G Tangalos
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 7.616

Review 6.  Laparoscopic repair of duodenal ulcer and gastroesophageal reflux.

Authors:  J B McKernan; B M Wolfe; B V MacFadyen
Journal:  Surg Clin North Am       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 2.741

7.  Comparison of laparoscopic and open retropubic urethropexy for treatment of stress urinary incontinence.

Authors:  T J Polascik; R G Moore; M T Rosenberg; L R Kavoussi
Journal:  Urology       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 2.649

8.  Staging laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection: comparison of results with open pelvic lymphadenectomy.

Authors:  R O Parra; C Andrus; J Boullier
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Laparoendoscopic upper pole partial nephrectomy with ureterectomy.

Authors:  G H Jordan; B H Winslow
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1993-09       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  Predictors of laparoscopic complications after formal training in laparoscopic surgery.

Authors:  W A See; C S Cooper; R J Fisher
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1993-12-08       Impact factor: 56.272

View more
  19 in total

1.  The role of multimedia interactive programs in training for laparoscopic procedures.

Authors:  B J Ramshaw; D Young; I Garcha; F Shuler; R Wilson; J G White; T Duncan; E Mason
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 2.  A comprehensive review of telementoring applications in laparoscopic general surgery.

Authors:  Stavros A Antoniou; George A Antoniou; Jan Franzen; Stefan Bollmann; Oliver O Koch; Rudolf Pointner; Frank A Granderath
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-02-15       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  An intelligent catheter system robotic controlled catheter system.

Authors:  M Negoro; M Tanimoto; F Arai; T Fukuda; K Fukasaku; I Takahashi; S Miyachi
Journal:  Interv Neuroradiol       Date:  2002-01-10       Impact factor: 1.610

Review 4.  Telementoring and telerobotics in urological surgery.

Authors:  Ben Challacombe; Sarah Wheatstone
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 3.092

5.  Clinical evaluation of tele-endoscopy using UMTS cellphones.

Authors:  Rudolf Seemann; Godoberto Guevara; Gerhard Undt; Rolf Ewers; Kurt Schicho
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-05-04       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Telemedicine and surgical robotics: urologic applications.

Authors:  B R Lee; J A Cadeddu; D Stoianovici; L R Kavoussi
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  1999

7.  Telementoring: an application whose time has come.

Authors:  James C Rosser; Steven M Young; Jonathan Klonsky
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-05-05       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 8.  Telemedicine in Surgery: What are the Opportunities and Hurdles to Realising the Potential?

Authors:  Nicholas Raison; Muhammad Shamim Khan; Ben Challacombe
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 3.092

9.  Strategies to improve communication in telementoring in acute care coordination: a scoping review.

Authors:  Lauren Hampton; Peter Brindley; Andrew Kirkpatrick; Jessica McKee; Julian Regehr; Douglas Martin; Anthony LaPorta; Jason Park; Ashley Vergis; Lawrence Gillman
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2020-11-30       Impact factor: 2.089

Review 10.  The evolution of surgical telementoring: current applications and future directions.

Authors:  Bassim El-Sabawi; William Magee
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2016-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.