[go: up one dir, main page]

Bethea et al., 2004 - Google Patents

Application of haptic feedback to robotic surgery

Bethea et al., 2004

View PDF @Full View
Document ID
991472801464807042
Author
Bethea B
Okamura A
Kitagawa M
Fitton T
Cattaneo S
Gott V
Baumgartner W
Yuh D
Publication year
Publication venue
Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques

External Links

Snippet

Robotic surgical systems have greatly contributed to the advancement of minimally invasive endoscopic surgery. However, current robotic systems do not provide tactile or haptic feedback to the operating surgeon. Under certain circumstances, particularly with the …
Continue reading at pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (PDF) (other versions)

Classifications

    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
    • A61B—DIAGNOSIS; SURGERY; IDENTIFICATION
    • A61B17/00—Surgical instruments, devices or methods, e.g. tourniquets
    • A61B17/00234—Surgical instruments, devices or methods, e.g. tourniquets for minimally invasive surgery
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G09—EDUCATION; CRYPTOGRAPHY; DISPLAY; ADVERTISING; SEALS
    • G09B—EDUCATIONAL OR DEMONSTRATION APPLIANCES; APPLIANCES FOR TEACHING, OR COMMUNICATING WITH, THE BLIND, DEAF OR MUTE; MODELS; PLANETARIA; GLOBES; MAPS; DIAGRAMS
    • G09B23/00—Models for scientific, medical, or mathematical purposes, e.g. full-sized devices for demonstration purposes
    • G09B23/28—Models for scientific, medical, or mathematical purposes, e.g. full-sized devices for demonstration purposes for medicine
    • G09B23/285—Models for scientific, medical, or mathematical purposes, e.g. full-sized devices for demonstration purposes for medicine for injections, endoscopy, bronchoscopy, sigmoidscopy, insertion of contraceptive devices or enemas
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
    • A61B—DIAGNOSIS; SURGERY; IDENTIFICATION
    • A61B17/00—Surgical instruments, devices or methods, e.g. tourniquets
    • A61B2017/00017—Electrical control of surgical instruments
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
    • A61B—DIAGNOSIS; SURGERY; IDENTIFICATION
    • A61B17/00—Surgical instruments, devices or methods, e.g. tourniquets
    • A61B17/28—Surgical forceps
    • A61B17/29—Forceps for use in minimally invasive surgery
    • A61B2017/2926—Details of heads or jaws
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
    • A61B—DIAGNOSIS; SURGERY; IDENTIFICATION
    • A61B17/00—Surgical instruments, devices or methods, e.g. tourniquets
    • A61B17/34—Trocars; Puncturing needles
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
    • A61B—DIAGNOSIS; SURGERY; IDENTIFICATION
    • A61B1/00—Instruments for performing medical examinations of the interior of cavities or tubes of the body by visual or photographical inspection, e.g. endoscopes; Illuminating arrangements therefor
    • A61B1/00002—Operational features of endoscopes
    • A61B1/00043—Operational features of endoscopes provided with signal output arrangements
    • A61B1/00045—Display arrangement

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
Bethea et al. Application of haptic feedback to robotic surgery
Guthart et al. The Intuitive/sup TM/telesurgery system: overview and application
Hubens et al. A performance study comparing manual and robotically assisted laparoscopic surgery using the da Vinci system
Freschi et al. Technical review of the da Vinci surgical telemanipulator
Marescaux et al. The ZEUS robotic system: experimental and clinical applications
Sun et al. Design and development of a da vinci surgical system simulator
Okamura Methods for haptic feedback in teleoperated robot‐assisted surgery
Berkelman et al. A compact modular teleoperated robotic system for laparoscopic surgery
Okamura et al. Haptics for robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery
Rockall The da Vinci telerobotic surgical system
Diez et al. Evaluation of haptic feedback on bimanually teleoperated laparoscopy for endometriosis surgery
Rassweiler et al. Robotics and telesurgery–an update on their position in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy
Hance et al. Robotics in colorectal surgery
Nakazawa et al. Feedback methods for collision avoidance using virtual fixtures for robotic neurosurgery in deep and narrow spaces
Hoznek et al. Laparoscopic and robotic surgical training in urology
Dankelman et al. Engineering for patient safety: Issues in minimally invasive procedures
Peters Robotic assisted surgery in pediatric urology
Renda et al. Principles and advantages of robotics in urologic surgery
Li et al. Microvascular anastomoses performed in rats using a microsurgical telemanipulator
Abdi et al. Third arm manipulation for surgical applications: an experimental study
Broeders et al. Robotics in laparoscopic surgery: current status and future perspectives
Narula et al. Robotic surgical systems
Peine et al. Effect of backlash on surgical robotic task proficiency
Felger et al. The evolution and early experience with robot-assisted mitral valve surgery
Falcone et al. Robotic surgery