Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 169

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Sensing and Manipulation Problems in Endoscopic Surgery: Experiment, Analysis, and Observation

Tendick, Frank, Jennings, Russell W., Tharp, Gregory, Stark, Lawrence·1993·Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments

Abstract

The minimally invasive nature of endoscopic surgery allows operations to be performed through small incisions, producing significantly less damage to good tissue than in conventional open surgery. Patient recovery times are thus greatly reduced. This major advantage has driven a dramatic growth of endoscopic techniques in a wide range of surgical applications. Unfortunately, the surgeon's abilities are severely hampered by the limitations of current endoscopic technology. In many ways endoscopic surgery is similar to teleoperation of a remote manipulator. Although the surgeon is physically close to the patient, the surgical environment is effectively “remote,” with sensing and manipulation transmitted through the endoscope and long instruments. Existing solutions from teleoperation applications could likely be applied to endoscopic surgery. This paper attempts to identify the major problems of current endoscopic technology, particularly in vision and manipulation. Vision issues are discussed in the first half, motivated by an experiment comparing surgeons' performance under different visual conditions. Surgeon subjects perform a three-dimensional positioning task with binocular direct vision, monocular direct vision, and a video endoscope. The lack of a stereoscopic view through the endoscope significantly slows performance of the tasks, but there are additional factors that make endoscopic viewing worse than monocular direct viewing. Relevant previous results which demonstrate the significance of interocular spacing in stereo viewing and the effect of display-control axes misalignment are also discussed. Issues of endoscopic manipulation are discussed in the second half of this paper, motivated by a suturing task comparing surgeons' performance with hand and endoscopic instruments. The constraint of endoscopic instruments' passing through the skin reduces their usable degrees of freedom and significantly increases the time to tie a suture knot. Kinematics of endoscopic instruments are compared to the human hand and arm. A model of the surgeon's precision grasp demonstrates the role of stiffness in fine motion control as an example of an advantage of the hand which is lost in the use of endoscopic instruments. The work described in this paper represents an initial effort in identifying problems and evaluating solutions in endoscopic surgery based on objective measurement of performance.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1162/pres.1993.2.1.66

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 169

Metadata

Authors
Tendick, F., Jennings, R. W., Tharp, G., & Stark, L.
Venue
Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments
Published
1993-01
Volume
2
Issue
1
Pages
66-81
ISSN
1054-7460 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W140917940
Cited by
169
References
0
FWCI
7.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Sensing and Manipulation Problems in Endoscopic Surgery: Experiment, Analysis, and Observation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1162/pres.1993.2.1.66
The paper
Tendick, F., Jennings, R. W., Tharp, G., & Stark, L. (1993). Sensing and Manipulation Problems in Endoscopic Surgery: Experiment, Analysis, and Observation. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments. https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.1993.2.1.66

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.