Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
World Journal of Urology
Published in: World Journal of Urology 2/2006

01-06-2006 | Topic Paper

Equipment and technology in surgical robotics

Authors: Hong Gee Sim, Sidney Kam Hung Yip, Christopher Wai Sam Cheng

Published in: World Journal of Urology | Issue 2/2006

Login to get access

Abstract

Contemporary medical robotic systems used in urologic surgery usually consist of a computer and a mechanical device to carry out the designated task with an image acquisition module. These systems are typically from one of the two categories: offline or online robots. Offline robots, also known as fixed path robots, are completely automated with pre-programmed motion planning based on pre-operative imaging studies where precise movements within set confines are carried out. Online robotic systems rely on continuous input from the surgeons and change their movements and actions according to the input in real time. This class of robots is further divided into endoscopic manipulators and master–slave robotic systems. Current robotic surgical systems have resulted in a paradigm shift in the minimally invasive approach to complex laparoscopic urological procedures. Future developments will focus on refining haptic feedback, system miniaturization and improved augmented reality and telesurgical capabilities.
Literature
1.
Li QH, Zamorano L, Pandya A et al (2002) The application accuracy of the NeuroMate robot—a quantitative comparison with frameless and frame-based surgical localization systems. Comput Aided Surg 7:90PubMed
2.
Bargar WL, Bauer A, Borner M (1998) Primary and revision total hip replacement using the Robodoc system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 354:82–91PubMedCrossRef
3.
Davies BL, Hibberd RD, Ng WS et al (1991) The development of a surgeon robot for prostatectomies. Proc Inst Mech Eng [H] 205:35
4.
Harris SJ, Arambula-Cosio F, Mei Q et al (1997) The Probot—an active robot for prostate resection. Proc Inst Mech Eng [H] 211:317
5.
Ho G, Ng WS, Teo MY et al (2001) Experimental study of transurethral robotic laser resection of the prostate using the LaserTrode lightguide. J Biomed Opt 6:244PubMedCrossRef
6.
Rovetta A, Sala R (1995) Execution of robot-assisted biopsies within the clinical context. J Image Guid Surg 1:280PubMedCrossRef
7.
Cleary K, Freedman M, Clifford M et al (2001) Image-guided robotic delivery system for precise placement of therapeutic agents. J Control Release 74:363PubMedCrossRef
8.
Fichtinger G, DeWeese TL, Patriciu A et al (2002) System for robotically assisted prostate biopsy and therapy with intraoperative CT guidance. Acad Radiol 9:60PubMedCrossRef
9.
Wei Z, Wan G, Gardi L et al (2004) Robot-assisted 3D-TRUS guided prostate brachytherapy: system integration and validation. Med Phys 31:539PubMedCrossRef
10.
Krieger A, Susil RC, Menard C et al (2005) Design of a novel MRI compatible manipulator for image guided prostate interventions. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 52:306PubMedCrossRef
11.
Hempel E, Fischer H, Gumb L et al (2003) An MRI-compatible surgical robot for precise radiological interventions. Comput Aided Surg 8:180PubMedCrossRef
12.
Cadeddu JA, Bzostek A, Schreiner S et al (1997) A robotic system for percutaneous renal access. J Urol 158:1589PubMedCrossRef
13.
Stoianovici DCK, Patriciu A, Mazilu D, Stanimir A, Craciumoiu N et al (2003) AcuBot: a robot for radiological interventions. IEEE Trans Rob Autom 19:926CrossRef
14.
Su LM, Stoianovici D, Jarrett TW et al (2002) Robotic percutaneous access to the kidney: comparison with standard manual access. J Endourol 16:471PubMedCrossRef
15.
Kasalicky MA, Svab J, Fried M et al (2002) [AESOP 3000—computer-assisted surgery, personal experience]. Rozhl Chir 81:346PubMed
16.
Kobayashi E, Masamune K, Sakuma I et al (1999) A new safe laparoscopic manipulator system with a five-bar linkage mechanism and an optical zoom. Comput Aided Surg 4:182PubMedCrossRef
17.
Salama IA, Schwaitzberg SD (2005) Utility of a voice-activated system in minimally invasive surgery. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 15:443PubMedCrossRef
18.
Rafiq A, Moore JA, Zhao X et al (2004) Digital video capture and synchronous consultation in open surgery. Ann Surg 239:567PubMedCrossRef
19.
Mendez I, Hill R, Clarke D et al (2005) Robotic long-distance telementoring in neurosurgery. Neurosurgery 56:434PubMedCrossRef
20.
Sung GT, Gill IS (2001) Robotic laparoscopic surgery: a comparison of the DA Vinci and Zeus systems. Urology 58:893PubMedCrossRef
21.
Menon M, Shrivastava A, Tewari A (2005) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: conventional and robotic. Urology 66:101PubMedCrossRef
22.
Sim HG, Yip SK, Lau WK et al (2004) Early experience with robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Asian J Surg 27:321PubMedCrossRef
23.
Sim HG, Yip SKH, Lau WKO, Tan YH, Wong MYC, Cheng CWS (2006) Team-based approach reduces learning curve in robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Int J Urol (in press)
24.
Kitagawa M, Dokko D, Okamura AM et al (2005) Effect of sensory substitution on suture-manipulation forces for robotic surgical systems. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 129:151PubMedCrossRef
25.
Tang SL, Kwoh CK, Teo MY et al (1998) Augmented reality systems for medical applications. IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag 17:49PubMedCrossRef
26.
27.
Marescaux J, Rubino F, Arenas M et al (2004) Augmented-reality-assisted laparoscopic adrenalectomy. Jama 292:2214PubMedCrossRef
28.
Hongo K, Kobayashi S, Kakizawa Y et al (2002) NeuRobot: telecontrolled micromanipulator system for minimally invasive microneurosurgery-preliminary results. Neurosurgery 51:985PubMedCrossRef
29.
Goto T, Hongo K, Kakizawa Y et al (2003) Clinical application of robotic telemanipulation system in neurosurgery. Case report. J Neurosurg 99:1082PubMedCrossRef
30.
Marescaux J, Leroy J, Gagner M et al (2001) Transatlantic robot-assisted telesurgery. Nature 413:379PubMedCrossRef
31.
Marescaux J, Leroy J, Rubino F et al (2002) Transcontinental robot-assisted remote telesurgery: feasibility and potential applications. Ann Surg 235:487PubMedCrossRef
32.
Lee BR, Caddedu JA, Janetschek G et al (1998) International surgical telementoring: our initial experience. Stud Health Technol Inform 50:41PubMed
33.
Lee BR, Png DJ, Liew L et al (2000) Laparoscopic telesurgery between the United States and Singapore. Ann Acad Med Singapore 29:665PubMed
34.
Lee BR, Bishoff JT, Janetschek G et al (1998) A novel method of surgical instruction: international telementoring. World J Urol 16:367PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Equipment and technology in surgical robotics
Authors
Hong Gee Sim
Sidney Kam Hung Yip
Christopher Wai Sam Cheng
Publication date
01-06-2006
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
World Journal of Urology / Issue 2/2006
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Electronic ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-006-0070-6

Other articles of this Issue 2/2006

World Journal of Urology 2/2006 Go to the issue

Topic Paper

Development of robotic program: an Asian experience

Original Article

Histamine receptors in human detrusor smooth muscle cells: physiological properties and immunohistochemical representation of subtypes

Original Article

Bilateral ureterocutaneostomy with modified stoma: long-term follow-up

Original Article

Radical versus postoperative radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: a 10-year experience of an academic hospital

Topic Paper

Robotic radical prostatectomy: the Vattikuti Urology Institute training experience

Topic Paper

Robotic extended pyelolithotomy for treatment of renal calculi: a feasibility study