Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

General Surgery: Current Trends and Recent Innovations

  • Chapter
Key Topics in Surgical Research and Methodology

Abstract

In surgery, new technology has been developed to eliminate some problems that surgeons face during more challenging laparoscopic or conventional operations. Surgical robotic systems have restored much of what was lost and altered the learning curve in the surgeon's favor. At the same time, advanced surgical instruments and optics continue the trend of the smaller scar. Minimally invasive surgery has given birth to a new and exciting era in surgical research. The future of surgical research lies, in part, in computer and visual technology.

This chapter begins by describing many of the current trends in surgical research. The second half of the chapter describes the latest innovations in general surgical research. Surgeons in numerous disciplines continue to make great strides in basic science research. However, the latest and most exciting innovations have largely developed through the integration of new innovative technology into surgical practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 229.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS (2000) To err is human: building a safer health system. National Academy Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bates DW, Leape LL, Cullen DJ et al (1998) Effect of computerized physician order entry and a team intervention on prevention of serious medication errors. JAMA 280:1311–1316

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Anon (2003) Scanning medication barcodes improves accuracy at Lehigh Valley Hospital. Perform Improv Advis 7:132–134; 129

    Google Scholar 

  4. Harvey-Berino J, Pintauro S, Buzzell P et al (2004) Effect of internet support on the long-term maintenance of weight loss. Obes Res 12:320–329

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Polzien KM, Jakicic JM, Tate DF et al (2007) The efficacy of a technology-based system in a short-term behavioral weight loss intervention. Obesity (Silver Spring) 15:825–830

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Saperstein SL, Atkinson NL, Gold RS (2007) The impact of Internet use for weight loss. Obes Rev 8:459–465

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Irwin RS (2007) Clinical trial registration promotes patient protection and benefit, advances the trust of everyone, and is required. Chest 131:639–641

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Khuri SF, Daley J, Henderson W et al (1998) The Department of Veterans Affairs' NSQIP: the first national, validated, outcome-based, risk-adjusted, and peer-controlled program for the measurement and enhancement of the quality of surgical care. National VA Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Ann Surg 228:491–507

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Silverman H, Hull SC, Sugarman J (2001) Variability among institutional review boards' decisions within the context of a multicenter trial. Crit Care Med 29:235–241

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Dyrbye LN, Thomas MR, Mechaber AJ et al (2007) Medical education research and IRB review: an analysis and comparison of the IRB review process at six institutions. Acad Med 82:654–660

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Stair TO, Reed CR, Radeos MS et al (2001) Variation in institutional review board responses to a standard protocol for a multicenter clinical trial. Acad Emerg Med 8:636–641

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Kilbridge P (2003) The cost of HIPAA compliance. N Engl J Med 348:1423–1424

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. O'Herrin JK, Fost N, Kudsk KA (2004) Health Insurance Portability Accountability Act (HIPAA) regulations: effect on medical record research. Ann Surg 239:772–776; discussion 776–778

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kulynych J, Korn D (2002) The effect of the new federal medical-privacy rule on research. N Engl J Med 346:201–204

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Tovino SA (2004) The use and disclosure of protected health information for research under the HIPAA privacy rule: unrealized patient autonomy and burdensome government regulation. S D Law Rev 49:447–502

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Henke PK, Fewel M (2007) Surgical research and the new privacy laws. Bull Am Coll Surg 92:26–29

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Dunlop AL, Graham T, Leroy Z et al (2007) The impact of HIPAA authorization on willingness to participate in clinical research. Ann Epidemiol 17:899–905

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Harrison RW III (2001) Impact of biomedical research on African Americans. J Natl Med Assoc 93:6S–7S

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Jackson HH, Jackson JD, Mulvihill SJ et al (2004) Trends in research support and productivity in the changing environment of academic surgery. J Surg Res 116:197–201

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Avis FP, Ellenberg S, Friedman MA (1988) Surgical oncology research. A disappointing status report. Ann Surg 207:262–266

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Bland KI (2007) Concerning trends and outcomes for National Institutes of Health funding of cancer research. J Surg Oncol 95:161–166

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Mello MM, Clarridge BR, Studdert DM (2005) Academic medical centers' standards for clinical-trial agreements with industry. N Engl J Med 352:2202–2210

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Kaiser J (2007) Conflict of interest. Stung by controversy, biomedical groups urge consistent guidelines. Science 317:441

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Marescaux J, Leroy J, Rubino F et al (2002) Transcontinental robot-assisted remote telesurgery: feasibility and potential applications. Ann Surg 235:487–492

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Pasticier G, Rietbergen JB, Guillonneau B et al (2001) Robotically assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: feasibility study in men. Eur Urol 40:70–74

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Patel VR, Chammas MF Jr, Shah S (2007) Robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a review of the current state of affairs. Int J Clin Pract 61:309–314

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Menon M, Kaul S, Bhandari A et al (2005) Potency following robotic radical prostatectomy: a questionnaire based analysis of outcomes after conventional nerve sparing and prostatic fascia sparing techniques. J Urol 174:2291–2296; discussion 2296

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Talamini MA, Chapman S, Horgan S et al (2003) A prospective analysis of 211 robotic-assisted surgical procedures. Surg Endosc 17:1521–1524

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Melvin WS, Dundon JM, Talamini M et al (2005) Computer-enhanced robotic telesurgery minimizes esophageal perforation during Heller myotomy. Surgery 138:553–558; discussion 558–559

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Galvani C, Gorodner MV, Moser F et al (2006) Laparoscopic Heller myotomy for achalasia facilitated by robotic assistance. Surg Endosc 20:1105–1112

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Moser F, Horgan S (2004) Robotically assisted bariatric surgery. Am J Surg 188:38S–44S

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Yu SC, Clapp BL, Lee MJ et al (2006) Robotic assistance provides excellent outcomes during the learning curve for laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: results from 100 robotic-assisted gastric bypasses. Am J Surg 192:746–749

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Mohr CJ, Nadzam GS, Curet MJ (2005) Totally robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Arch Surg 140:779–786

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Kendoff D, Pearle A, Hufner T et al (2007) First clinical results and consequences of intraoperative three-dimensional imaging at tibial plateau fractures. J Trauma 63:239–244

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Nathan CO, Chakradeo V, Malhotra K et al (2006) The voice-controlled robotic assist scope holder AESOP for the endoscopic approach to the sella. Skull Base 16:123–131

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Nebot PB, Jain Y, Haylett K et al (2003) Comparison of task performance of the camera-holder robots EndoAssist and Aesop. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 13:334–338

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Husted TL, Broderick TJ (2006) NASA and the emergence of new surgical technologies. J Surg Res 132:13–16

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Rentschler ME, Dumpert J, Platt SR et al (2007) Natural orifice surgery with an endoluminal mobile robot. Surg Endosc 21:1212–1215

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Kalloo AN, Singh VK, Jagannath SB et al (2004) Flexible transgastric peritoneoscopy: a novel approach to diagnostic and therapeutic interventions in the peritoneal cavity. Gastrointest Endosc 60:114–117

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Rattner D, Kalloo A (2006) ASGE/SAGES Working Group on Natural Orifice Translumenal Endoscopic Surgery. October 2005. Surg Endosc 20:329–333

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Pai RD, Fong DG, Bundga ME et al (2006) Transcolonic endoscopic cholecystectomy: a NOTES survival study in a porcine model (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 64:428–434

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Park PO, Bergstrom M, Ikeda K et al (2005) Experimental studies of transgastric gallbladder surgery: cholecystectomy and cholecystogastric anastomosis (videos). Gastrointest Endosc 61:601–606

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Jagannath SB, Kantsevoy SV, Vaughn CA et al (2005) Peroral transgastric endoscopic ligation of fallopian tubes with long-term survival in a porcine model. Gastrointest Endosc 61:449–453

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Bergstrom M, Ikeda K, Swain P et al (2006) Transgastric anastomosis by using flexible endoscopy in a porcine model (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 63:307–312

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Swain P (2007) The ShapeLock system adapted to intragas-tric and transgastric surgery. Endoscopy 39:466–470

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Schweitzer M (2004) Endoscopic intraluminal suture plication of the gastric pouch and stoma in postoperative Roux-en-Y gastric bypass patients. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 14:223–226

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. van Noordwijk J (2001) Dialysing for life: the development of the artificial kidney. Kluwer, Boston

    Book  Google Scholar 

  48. Wolff B, Machill K, Schumacher D et al (2007) MARS dialysis in decompensated alcoholic liver disease: a single-center experience. Liver Transpl 13:1189–1192

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Kjaergard LL, Liu J, Als-Nielsen B et al (2003) Artificial and bioartificial support systems for acute and acute-on-chronic liver failure: a systematic review. JAMA 289:217–222

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Sen S, Williams R, Jalan R (2005) Emerging indications for albumin dialysis. Am J Gastroenterol 100:468–475

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Gray NA Jr, Selzman CH (2006) Current status of the total artificial heart. Am Heart J 152:4–10

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Leprince P, Bonnet N, Rama A et al (2003) Bridge to transplantation with the Jarvik-7 (CardioWest) total artificial heart: a single-center 15-year experience. J Heart Lung Transplant 22:1296–1303

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Jordan SW, Chaikof EL (2007) Novel thromboresistant materials. J Vasc Surg 45(Suppl A):A104–A115

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Cobb WS, Kercher KW, Heniford BT (2005) The argument for lightweight polypropylene mesh in hernia repair. Surg Innov 12:63–69

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Ren CJ, Fielding GA (2003) Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding [Lap-Band]. Curr Surg 60:30–33

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. McNatt SS, Longhi JJ, Goldman CD et al (2007) Surgery for obesity: a review of the current state of the art and future directions. J Gastrointest Surg 11:377–397

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Steiner S, Dyer N, Everett J et al (2005) Will we merge with machines? Available at: http://www.popsci.com/scitech/article/2005-08/will-we-merge-machines

  58. Ahlberg G, Heikkinen T, Iselius L et al (2002) Does training in a virtual reality simulator improve surgical performance? Surg Endosc 16:126–129

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Hanly EJ, Miller BE, Kumar R et al (2006) Mentoring console improves collaboration and teaching in surgical robotics. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 16:445–451

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Cubano M, Poulose BK, Talamini MA et al (1999) Long distance telementoring. A novel tool for laparoscopy aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln. Surg Endosc 13:673–678

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, University of California at San Diego, 200 West Arbor Drive, San Diego, CA, 8400, USA

    John P. Cullen

  2. Department of Surgery, University of California at San Diego, 200 West Arbor Drive, #8400, San Diego, CA, 92103, USA

    Mark A. Talamini

Authors
  1. John P. Cullen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mark A. Talamini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mark A. Talamini .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. Biosurgery & Surgical Technology, Imperial College London St. Mary's Hospital London, 10th floor QEQM Bldg. Praed Street, London, W2 1NY, United Kingdom

    Thanos Athanasiou  & Ara Darzi  & 

  2. UCSF Global Health Sciences, 3333 California Street, Suite 285, San Francisco L, CA, 94143-0443, USA

    Haile Debas

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Cullen, J.P., Talamini, M.A. (2010). General Surgery: Current Trends and Recent Innovations. In: Athanasiou, T., Debas, H., Darzi, A. (eds) Key Topics in Surgical Research and Methodology. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-71915-1_62

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-71915-1_62

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-71914-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-71915-1

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation