Abstract
Telesurgery, a cutting-edge field at the intersection of medicine and technology, holds immense promise for enhancing surgical capabilities, extending medical care, and improving patient outcomes. In this scenario, this article explores the landscape of technical and ethical considerations that highlight the advancement and adoption of telesurgery. Network considerations are crucial for ensuring seamless and low-latency communication between remote surgeons and robotic systems, while technical challenges encompass system reliability, latency reduction, and the integration of emerging technologies like artificial intelligence and 5G networks. Therefore, this article also explores the critical role of network infrastructure, highlighting the necessity for low-latency, high-bandwidth, secure and private connections to ensure patient safety and surgical precision. Moreover, ethical considerations in telesurgery include patient consent, data security, and the potential for remote surgical interventions to distance surgeons from their patients. Legal and regulatory frameworks require refinement to accommodate the unique aspects of telesurgery, including liability, licensure, and reimbursement. Our article presents a comprehensive analysis of the current state of telesurgery technology and its potential while critically examining the challenges that must be navigated for its widespread adoption.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
Not applicable.
References
Marescaux J, Leroy J, Rubino F et al (2002) Transcontinental robot-assisted remote telesurgery: feasibility and potential applications. Ann Surg 235(4):487–492. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-200204000-00005
Brower V (2002) The cutting edge in surgery: telesurgery has been shown to be feasible—now it has to be made economically viable. EMBO Rep 3(4):300–301. https://doi.org/10.1093/embo-reports/kvf083
Navarro EM, Ramos Álvarez AN, Soler Anguiano FI (2022) A new telesurgery generation supported by 5G technology: benefits and future trends. Procedia Computer Science 200:31–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2022.01.202
Frenkel CH (2023) Telesurgery’s evolution during the robotic surgery renaissance and a systematic review of its ethical considerations. Surg Innov. https://doi.org/10.1177/15533506231169073
Olejarczyk JP, Young M (2023) Patient rights and ethics. StatPearls Publishing, Petersburg
Collins JW, Ghazi A, Stoyanov D et al (2020) Utilising an accelerated delphi process to develop guidance and protocols for telepresence applications in remote robotic surgery training. Eur Open Sci 22:23–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euros.2020.09.005
Meara JG, Leather AJM, Hagander L et al (2016) Global surgery 2030: evidence and solutions for achieving health, welfare, and economic development. Int J Obstet Anesth 25:75–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijoa.2015.09.006
Dohler M (2021) The internet of skills: how 5g synchronized reality is transforming robotic surgery. Springer International Publishing, Berlin
Kim SSY, Dohler M, Dasgupta P (2018) The Internet of Skills: use of fifth-generation telecommunications, haptics and artificial intelligence in robotic surgery. BJU Int 122(3):356–358. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14388
Hokayem PF, Spong MW (2006) Bilateral teleoperation: an historical survey. Automatica 42(12):2035–2057. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.automatica.2006.06.027
Miao Y, Jiang Y, Peng L, Hossain MS, Muhammad G (2018) Telesurgery robot based on 5G tactile internet. Mobile Netw Appl 23(6):1645–1654. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11036-018-1110-3
Ji H, Park S, Yeo J, Kim Y, Lee J, Shim B (2018) Ultra-reliable and low-latency communications in 5g downlink: physical layer aspects. IEEE Wireless Commun 25(3):124–130. https://doi.org/10.1109/MWC.2018.1700294
Farajiparvar P, Ying H, Pandya A (2020) A brief survey of telerobotic time delay mitigation. Front Robot AI 7:578805. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2020.578805
**a SB, Lu QS (2021) Development status of telesurgery robotic system. Chin J Traumatol 24(3):144–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjtee.2021.03.001
Patel TM, Shah SC, Pancholy SB (2019) Long distance tele-robotic-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention: a report of first-in-human experience. EClinicalMedicine 14:53–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2019.07.017
Wiklund P, Mottrie A, Gundeti MS, Patel V (2022) Robotic urologic surgery. Springer International Publishing, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-00363-9
Sachdeva N, Klopukh M, Clair RST, Hahn WE (2021) Using conditional generative adversarial networks to reduce the effects of latency in robotic telesurgery. J Robotic Surg 15(4):635–641. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-020-01149-5
Nankaku A, Tokunaga M, Yonezawa H et al (2022) Maximum acceptable communication delay for the realization of telesurgery. PLoS ONE 17(10):e0274328. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0274328
Muchtar F, Abdullah AH, Al-Adhaileh M, Zamli KZ (2020) Energy conservation strategies in named data networking based MANET using congestion control: a review. J Netw Comput Appl 152:102511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnca.2019.102511
Engelbart M, Ott J. Congestion control for real-time media over QUIC. In: Proceedings of the 2021 Workshop on Evolution, Performance and Interoperability of QUIC. ACM; 2021:1–7.https://doi.org/10.1145/3488660.3493801
Johansson I, Sarker Z. Self-Clocked Rate Adaptation for Multimedia. RFC Editor. 2017: RFC8298. doi:https://doi.org/10.17487/RFC8298
Ahmed Solyman AA, Yahya K (2022) Evolution of wireless communication networks: from 1G to 6G and future perspective. IJECE 12(4):3943. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijece.v12i4.pp3943-3950
Ahmadi S, Ahmadi S (2019) 5G NR: architecture, technology implementation, and operation of 3g pp new radio standards. Elsevier, Amsterdam
Börner Valdez L, Datta RR, Babic B, Müller DT, Bruns CJ, Fuchs HF (2021) 5G mobile communication applications for surgery: An overview of the latest literature. AIGE 2(1):1–11. https://doi.org/10.37126/aige.v2.i1.1
Tikhvinskiy V, Bochechka G. Quality of service in the 5G network.
Morohashi H, Hakamada K, Kanno T et al (2023) Construction of redundant communications to enhance safety against communication interruptions during robotic remote surgery. Sci Rep 13(1):10831. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-37730-9
Barba P, Stramiello J, Funk EK, Richter F, Yip MC, Orosco RK (2022) Remote telesurgery in humans: a systematic review. Surg Endosc 36(5):2771–2777. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09074-4
Huang T, Li R, Li Y, Zhang X, Liao H (2021) Augmented reality-based autostereoscopic surgical visualization system for telesurgery. Int J CARS 16(11):1985–1997. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-021-02463-5
Schleer P, Kaiser P, Drobinsky S, Radermacher K (2020) Augmentation of haptic feedback for teleoperated robotic surgery. Int J CARS 15(3):515–529. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-020-02118-x
Patel RV, Atashzar SF, Tavakoli M (2022) Haptic feedback and force-based teleoperation in surgical robotics. Proc IEEE 110(7):1012–1027. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2022.3180052
Xu S, Perez M, Yang K, Perrenot C, Felblinger J, Hubert J (2014) Determination of the latency effects on surgical performance and the acceptable latency levels in telesurgery using the dV-Trainer® simulator. Surg Endosc 28(9):2569–2576. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3504-z
Hinterseer P, Hirche S, Chaudhuri S, Steinbach E, Buss M (2008) Perception-based data reduction and transmission of haptic data in telepresence and teleaction systems. IEEE Trans Signal Process 56(2):588–597. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSP.2007.906746
Chowriappa A, Wirz R, Ashammagari AR, Seo YW (2013) Prediction from expert demonstrations for safe tele-surgery. Int J Autom Comput 10(6):487–497. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11633-013-0746-5
Orosco RK, Lurie B, Matsuzaki T et al (2021) Compensatory motion scaling for time-delayed robotic surgery. Surg Endosc 35(6):2613–2618. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-020-07681-7
Jacobs S, Holzhey D, Kiaii BB et al (2003) Limitations for manual and telemanipulator-assisted motion tracking—implications for endoscopic beating-heart surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 76(6):2029–2035. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-4975(03)01058-0
Cassilly R, Diodato MD, Bottros M, Damiano RJ (2004) Optimizing motion scaling and magnification in robotic surgery. Surgery 136(2):291–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2004.05.002
Prasad SM, Prasad SM, Maniar HS, Chu C, Schuessler RB, Damiano RJ (2004) Surgical robotics: impact of motion scaling on task performance. J Am Coll Surg 199(6):863–868. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2004.08.027
Cha J, Broch A, Mudge S et al (2018) Real-time, label-free, intraoperative visualization of peripheral nerves and micro-vasculatures using multimodal optical imaging techniques. Biomed Opt Express 9(3):1097. https://doi.org/10.1364/BOE.9.001097
Richter F, Zhang Y, Zhi Y, Orosco RK, Yip MC. Augmented reality predictive displays to help mitigate the effects of delayed telesurgery. In: 2019 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). IEEE; 2019:444–450. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRA.2019.8794051
Qian L, Deguet A, Kazanzides P (2018) ARssist: augmented reality on a head-mounted display for the first assistant in robotic surgery. Healthcare Technol Lett 5(5):194–200. https://doi.org/10.1049/htl.2018.5065
Dohler M. Digital Innovation project buckinghamshire county council association of directors of environment, economy planning and transport (ADEPT). Kings College. London
Collins JW, Marcus HJ, Ghazi A et al (2022) Ethical implications of AI in robotic surgical training: A Delphi consensus statement. Eur Urol Focus 8(2):613–622. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2021.04.006
Kazanzides P, Deguet A, Vagvolgyi B, Chen Z, Taylor RH (2015) Modular interoperability in surgical robotics software. Mech Eng 137(09):S19–S22. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2015-Sep-10
Hazra A, Adhikari M, Amgoth T, Srirama SN (2023) A comprehensive survey on interoperability for iiot: taxonomy, standards, and future directions. ACM Comput Surv 55(1):1–35. https://doi.org/10.1145/3485130
King H. Preliminary protocol for interoperable telesurgery. In: ; 2009:1–6.
T Bonaci J Herron T Yusuf J Yan T Kohno HJ Chizeck 2015. To make a robot secure: an experimental analysis of cyber security threats against teleoperated surgical robots Published online. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.1504.04339
Al Asif MdR, Khondoker R. Cyber Security Threat Modeling of A Telesurgery System. In: 2020 2nd International Conference on Sustainable Technologies for Industry 4.0 (STI). IEEE; 2020:1–6. doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/STI50764.2020.9350452
Lee GS, Thuraisingham B (2012) Cyberphysical systems security applied to telesurgical robotics. Computer Standards Interf 34(1):225–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csi.2011.09.001
Bonaci T, Yan J, Herron J, Kohno T, Chizeck HJ (2015) Experimental analysis of denial-of-service attacks on teleosperated robotic systems. ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/27359602735980
Cherian MM, Varma SL (2021) Department of computer engineering, pillai college of engineering, navi mumbai, mumbai university, mitigation of DDOS and MiTM attacks using belief based secure correlation approach in SDN-based IoT networks. IJCNIS. 14(1):52–68. https://doi.org/10.5815/ijcnis.2022.01.05
Hannaford B, Rosen J, Friedman DW et al (2013) Raven-II: an open platform for surgical robotics research. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 60(4):954–959. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2012.2228858
Alemzadeh H, Chen D, Li X, Kesavadas T, Kalbarczyk ZT, Iyer RK. Targeted Attacks on teleoperated surgical robots: dynamic model-based detection and mitigation. In: 2016 46th Annual IEEE/IFIP International conference on dependable systems and networks (DSN). IEEE; 2016: 395–406. https://doi.org/10.1109/DSN.2016.43
Q Zhang J Liu G Zhao 2018 Towards 5G enabled tactile robotic telesurgery Published online https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.1803.03586
Iqbal S, Farooq S, Shahzad K, Malik AW, Hamayun MM, Hasan O (2019) SecureSurgiNET: a framework for ensuring security in telesurgery. Int J Distrib Sens Netw 15(9):155014771987381. https://doi.org/10.1177/1550147719873811
Kaur K, Garg S, Kaddoum G, Guizani M. Secure Authentication and Key Agreement Protocol for Tactile Internet-based Tele-Surgery Ecosystem. In: ICC 2020–2020 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC). IEEE; 2020:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICC40277.2020.9148835
Watzlaf VJM, Zhou L, DeAlmeida DR, Hartman LM (2017) A systematic review of research studies examining telehealth privacy and security practices used by healthcare providers. Int J Telerehab 9(2):39–58. https://doi.org/10.5195/ijt.2017.6231
Loftus TJ, Tighe PJ, Filiberto AC et al (2020) Artificial intelligence and surgical decision-making. JAMA Surg 155(2):148. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2019.4917
Maier-Hein L, Eisenmann M, Sarikaya D et al (2022) Surgical data science—from concepts toward clinical translation. Med Image Anal 76:102306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2021.102306
Hashimoto DA, Rosman G, Rus D, Meireles OR (2018) Artificial intelligence in surgery: promises and perils. Ann Surg 268(1):70–76. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002693
Kitaguchi D, Takeshita N, Hasegawa H, Ito M (2022) Artificial intelligence-based computer vision in surgery: recent advances and future perspectives. Ann Gastroent Surg 6(1):29–36. https://doi.org/10.1002/ags3.12513
Hassan AM, Rajesh A, Asaad M et al (2023) Artificial intelligence and machine learning in prediction of surgical complications: current state, applications, and implications. Am Surg 89(1):25–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/00031348221101488
Hassan AM, Rajesh A, Asaad M et al (2023) A surgeon’s guide to artificial intelligence-driven predictive models. Am Surg 89(1):11–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/00031348221103648
Marino DL, Grandio J, Wickramasinghe CS, et al. AI Augmentation for Trustworthy AI: Augmented Robot Teleoperation. In: 2020 13th International Conference on Human System Interaction (HSI). IEEE; 2020:155–161. https://doi.org/10.1109/HSI49210.2020.9142659
Wickramasinghe CS, Marino DL, Grandio J, Manic M. Trustworthy AI Development Guidelines for Human System Interaction. In: 2020 13th International Conference on Human System Interaction (HSI). IEEE; 2020:130–136. https://doi.org/10.1109/HSI49210.2020.9142644
Seeliger B, Collins J, Porpiglia F, Marescaux J (2002) The role of virtual reality, telesurgery, and teleproctoring in robotic surgery. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-00363-9_8
Parsons JA (2021) The telemedical imperative. Bioethics 35(4):298–306. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12847
Fuertes-Guiro F, Viteri VE (2018) Ethical aspects involving the use of information technology in new surgical applications: telesurgery and surgical telementoring. Acta bioeth 24(2):167–179
Anvari M (2004) Robot-assisted remote telepresence surgery. Surg Innov 11(2):123–128. https://doi.org/10.1177/107155170401100209
Hung AJ, Chen J, Shah A, Gill IS (2018) Telementoring and telesurgery for minimally invasive procedures. J Urol 199(2):355–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.06.082
Castaneda P, Ellimoottil C (2020) Current use of telehealth in urology: a review. World J Urol 38(10):2377–2384. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-02882-9
Satava RM (2002) Disruptive visions. Surg Endosc 16(10):1403–1408. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-002-8587-2
Nguan CY, Morady R, Wang C et al (2008) Robotic pyeloplasty using internet protocol and satellite network-based telesurgery. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg 4(1):10–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.173
Liu R, Zhao G, Sun Y, Yang W, Liu J, Huang Y et al (2019) Animal experiment for 5G remote robotic surgery. Chin J Laparosc Surg (Electr Ed) [Internet] 12:45. https://doi.org/10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-6899.2019.01.008
Tian W, Fan M, Zeng C, Liu Y, He D, Zhang Q (2020) Telerobotic spinal Surgery based on 5G network: the first 12 cases. Neurospine [Internet]. 17(1):114–120. https://doi.org/10.14245/ns.1938454.227
Acemoglu A, Peretti G, Trimarchi M, Hysenbelli J, Krieglstein J, Geraldes A, Deshpande N, Ceysens PMV, Caldwell DG, Delsanto M, Barboni O, Vio T, Baggioni S, Vinciguerra A, Sanna A, Oleari E, Camillo Carobbio AL, Guastini L, Mora F, Mattos LS. Operating from a distance: robotic vocal cord 5G Telesurgery on a cadaver
TIM enables first live remote‐surgery consultation using 5G immersive reality | Mobile Marketing Magazine [Internet]. https://mobilemarketingmagazine.com/tim-enables-first-live-remote-surgery-consultation-using-5g-immersive-reality
Zheng J, Wang Y, Zhang J, Guo W, Yang X, Luo L, Jiao W, Hu X, Yu Z, Wang C, Zhu L, Yang Z, Zhang M, **e F, Jia Y, Li B, Li Z, Dong Q, Niu H (2020) 5G ultra-remote robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery in China. Surg Endosc [Internet]. 34(11):5172–5180. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-020-07823-x
Chu G, Yang X, Luo L et al (2021) Improved robot-assisted laparoscopic telesurgery: feasibility of network converged communication. Br J Surg 108(11):e377–379. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znab317
Li J, Yang X, Chu G et al (2023) Application of Improved Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Telesurgery with 5G Technology in Urology. Eur Urol 83(1):41–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2022.06.018
Funding
The authors have not disclosed any funding
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
VP prepared figures, wrote and oversaw coordination SS wrote technical part in main manuscript MC wrote the ethical part in the main manuscript EP prepared the table PD, RS oversaw the ethical considerations MD, JC oversaw the technical considerations JM helped coordinate the preparation with VP
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Patel, V., Saikali, S., Moschovas, M.C. et al. Technical and ethical considerations in telesurgery. J Robotic Surg 18, 40 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-023-01797-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-023-01797-3