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 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Surgical Endoscopy

01-08-2012 | Review

Review of surgical robotics user interface: what is the best way to control robotic surgery?

Authors: Anton Simorov, R. Stephen Otte, Courtni M. Kopietz, Dmitry Oleynikov

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 8/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

As surgical robots begin to occupy a larger place in operating rooms around the world, continued innovation is necessary to improve our outcomes.

Methods

A comprehensive review of current surgical robotic user interfaces was performed to describe the modern surgical platforms, identify the benefits, and address the issues of feedback and limitations of visualization.

Results

Most robots currently used in surgery employ a master/slave relationship, with the surgeon seated at a work-console, manipulating the master system and visualizing the operation on a video screen. Although enormous strides have been made to advance current technology to the point of clinical use, limitations still exist. A lack of haptic feedback to the surgeon and the inability of the surgeon to be stationed at the operating table are the most notable examples. The future of robotic surgery sees a marked increase in the visualization technologies used in the operating room, as well as in the robots’ abilities to convey haptic feedback to the surgeon. This will allow unparalleled sensation for the surgeon and almost eliminate inadvertent tissue contact and injury.

Conclusions

A novel design for a user interface will allow the surgeon to have access to the patient bedside, remaining sterile throughout the procedure, employ a head-mounted three-dimensional visualization system, and allow the most intuitive master manipulation of the slave robot to date.
Literature
1.
2.
3.
4.
Shah A, Okotie OT, Zhao L, Pins MR, Bhalani V, Dalton DP (2008) Pathologic outcomes during the learning curve for robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Int Braz J Urol 34(2):159–163PubMedCrossRef
5.
Tan GY, Goel RK, Kaouk JH, Tewari AK (2009) Technological advances in robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery. Urol Clin North Am 36(2):237–249PubMedCrossRef
6.
Phee SJ, Low SC, Huynh VA, Kencana AP, Sun ZL, Yang K (2009) Master and slave transluminal endoscopic robot (MASTER) for natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES). Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2009:1192–1195PubMed
7.
Sun Z, Ang RY, Lim EW, Wang Z, Ho KY, Phee SJ (2011) Enhancement of a master-slave robotic system for natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery. Ann Acad Med Singapore 40(5):223–228PubMed
8.
Phee SJ, Ho KY, Lomanto D, Low SC, Huynh VA, Kencana AP, Yang K, Sun ZL, Chung SC (2010) Natural orifice transgastric endoscopic wedge hepatic resection in an experimental model using an intuitively controlled master and slave transluminal endoscopic robot (MASTER). Surg Endosc 24(9):2293–2298PubMedCrossRef
9.
Ho KY, Phee SJ, Shabbir A, Low SC, Huynh VA, Kencana AP, Yang K, Lomanto D, So BY, Wong YY, Chung SC (2010) Endoscopic submucosal dissection of gastric lesions by using a Master and Slave Transluminal Endoscopic Robot (MASTER). Gastrointest Endosc 72(3):593–599PubMedCrossRef
10.
Hagn U, Konietschke R, Tobergte A, Nickl M, Jörg S, Kübler B, Passig G, Gröger M, Fröhlich F, Seibold U, Le-Tien L, Albu-Schäffer A, Nothhelfer A, Hacker F, Grebenstein M, Hirzinger G (2010) DLR MiroSurge: a versatile system for research in endoscopic telesurgery. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 5(2):183–193PubMedCrossRef
11.
12.
Konietschke R, Hagn U, Nickl M, Jörg S, Tobergte A, Passig G, Seibold U, Le Tien L, Kuebler B, Gröger M, Fröhlich F, Rink C, Albu-Schäffer A, Grebenstein M, Ortmaier T, Hirzinger G (2009) The DLR MiroSurge: a robotic system for surgery. Video contribution presented at ICRA
13.
Suppa M, Kielhofer S, Langwald J, Hacker F, Strobl KH, Hirzinger G (2007) The 3D-modeller: a multi-purpose vision platform. IEEE Int Conf Robot Autom 2007:781–787. doi:10.​1109/​ROBOT.​2007.​363081
14.
Harnett BM, Doarn CR, Rosen J, Hannaford B, Broderick TJ (2008) Evaluation of unmanned airborne vehicles and mobile robotic telesurgery in an extreme environment. Telemed J E Health 14(6):539–544PubMedCrossRef
15.
16.
Bornhoft JM, Strabala KW, Wortman TD, Lehman AC, Oleynikov D, Farritor SM (2011) Stereoscopic visualization and haptic technology used to create a virtual environment for remote surgery. Biomed Sci Instrum 47:76–81PubMed
17.
Zhang X, Nelson C, Oleynikov D (2011) Natural haptic interface for single-port surgical robot with gravity compensation. Int J Med Robot 7(S1). Epub 4 Nov 2011
18.
Lum M, Friedman D, Rosen J et al (2009) The RAVEN–design and validation of a telesurgery system. Int J Rob Res 28(9):1183–1197CrossRef
19.
Lang MJ, Greer AD, Sutherland GR (2011) Intra-operative robotics: NeuroArm. Acta Neurochir Suppl 109:231–236PubMedCrossRef
20.
Samad MD, Hu Y, Sutherland GR (2010) Effect of force feedback from each DOF on the motion accuracy of a surgical tool in performing a robot-assisted tracing task. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2010:2093–2096PubMed
21.
Sutherland GR, Latour I, Greer AD (2008) Integrating an image-guided robot with intraoperative MRI. IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag 27(3):59–65PubMedCrossRef
22.
Joel P, Rosen J, Burns S (2007) Upper-limb powered exoskeleton design. IEEE ASME Trans Mechatron 12(4):408–417CrossRef
23.
Joel P, Powell J, Rosen J (2009) Isotropy of an upper limb exoskeleton and the kinematics and dynamics of the human arm. Appl Bionics Biomech 6(2):175–191CrossRef
24.
Ettore C, Rosen J, Joel P, Burns S (2006) Myoprocessor for neural controlled powered exoskeleton arm. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 53(11):2387–2396CrossRef
25.
Wortman TD, Strabala KW, Lehman AC, Farritor SM, Oleynikov D (2011) Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery using a multi-functional miniature in vivo robot. Int J Med Robot 7(1):17–21PubMedCrossRef
26.
Lehman A, Wood N, Farritor S, Goede M, Oleynikov D (2011) Dexterous miniature robot for advanced minimally invasive surgery. Surg Endosc 25(1):119–123PubMedCrossRef
27.
Teber D, Baumhauer M, Guven EO et al (2009) Robotic and imaging in urological surgery. Curr Opin Urol 19:108–113PubMedCrossRef
28.
Pamplona VF, Fernandes LAF, Prauchner J, Nedel LP, Olivier MM (2008) The image-based data glove. Proceedings of X Symposium on Virtual Real (SVR 2008) 204–211
29.
Sturman DJ, Zeltzer D (1994) A survey of glove based-input. IEEE Comput Graph Appl 14(1):30–39CrossRef
30.
Faraz A, Payandeh S (2000) Engineering approaches to mechanical and robotic design for minimally invasive surgery (MIS). Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, pp 1–11
31.
Okamura AM (2009) Haptic feedback in robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery. Curr Opin Urol 19(1):102–107PubMedCrossRef
32.
Tholey G, Desai JP (2007) A general purpose 7 DOF haptic device: applications towards robot-assisted surgery. IEEE/ASME Trans Mech 12(6):662–669CrossRef
33.
Mavash M (2006) Novel approach for modeling separating forces between deformable bodies. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed 10(3):618–626CrossRef
34.
Mavash M, Hayward V (2004) High fidelity haptic synthesis of contact with deformable bodies. IEEE Comput Graph Appl 24(2):28–55
35.
Mavash M, Voo LM, Kim D et al (2008) Modeling the forces of cutting with scissors. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 55(3):848–856CrossRef
36.
Weiss H, Ortmaier T, Maass H et al (2003) A virtual reality based haptic surgical training system. Comput Aided Surg 8(5):269–272PubMedCrossRef
37.
Wagner CR, Howe RD (2007) Force feedback benefit depends on experience in multiple degree of freedom robotic surgery. IEEE Trans Rob 23(6):1235–1240CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Review of surgical robotics user interface: what is the best way to control robotic surgery?
Authors
Anton Simorov
R. Stephen Otte
Courtni M. Kopietz
Dmitry Oleynikov
Publication date
01-08-2012
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 8/2012
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2182-y