Robotics in percutaneous cardiovascular interventions

Reference

• O'Gara PT, Kushner FG, Ascheim DD, et al. 2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines Circulation. 2013;127:529–555.
   Google Scholar
• Levine GN, Bates ER, Blankenship JC, et al. ACCF/AHA/SCAI guideline for percutaneous coronary intervention. A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;2011(58):e44–122.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Writing Group Members, Mozaffarian D, Benjamin EJ, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics-2016 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2016;133:447–454.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones WS, Mi X, Qualls LG, et al. Trends in settings for peripheral vascular intervention and the effect of changes in the outpatient prospective payment system. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65:920–927.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andreassi MG, Piccaluga E, Guagliumi G, et al. Occupational health risks in cardiac catheterization laboratory workers. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9:e003273.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duran DDG, Ramirez R, Vano E, et al. Cataracts in interventional cardiology personnel. Retrospective evaluation study of lens injuries and dose (RELID Study). Eur Heart J. 2009;30(Abstractsupplement):872.
   Google Scholar
• Ingwersen M, Drabik A, Kulka U, et al. Physicians’ radiation exposure in the catheterization lab: does the type of procedure matter? JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:1095–1102.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein LW, Tra Y, Garratt KN, et al. Occupational health hazards of interventional cardiologists in the current decade: results of the 2014 SCAI membership survey. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;86:913–924.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross AM, Segal J, Borenstein D, et al. Prevalence of spinal disc disease among interventional cardiologists. Am J Cardiol. 1997;79:68–70.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roguin A, Goldstein J, Bar O, et al. Brain and neck tumors among physicians performing interventional procedures. Am J Cardiol. 2013;111:1368–1372.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reeves RR, Ang L, Bahadorani J, et al. Invasive cardiologists are exposed to greater left sided cranial radiation: the BRAIN study (Brain Radiation Exposure and Attenuation During Invasive Cardiology Procedures). JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8:1197–1206.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wassef AW, Hiebert B, Ravandi A, et al. Radiation dose reduction in the cardiac catheterization laboratory utilizing a novel protocol. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7:550–557.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rehani MM. Training of interventional cardiologists in radiation protection–the IAEA’s initiatives. Int J Cardiol. 2007;114:256–260.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yao DK, Chen H, Ma LL, et al. Totally endoscopic atrial septal repair with or without robotic assistance: a systematic review and meta-analysis of case series. Heart Lung Circ. 2013;22:433–440.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grodanz E. Robotic mitral valve repair. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2015;30:325–331.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang N, Zhou JJ, Phan S, et al. Robot-assisted hybrid coronary revascularisation: systematic review. Heart Lung Circ. 2015;24:1171–1179.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shurrab M, Danon A, Lashevsky I, et al. Robotically assisted ablation of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol. 2013;169:157–165.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell PT, Mahmud E, Marshall JJ. Interoperator and intraoperator (in)accuracy of stent selection based on visual estimation. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;86:1177–1183.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell PT, Kruse KR, Kroll CR, et al. The impact of precise robotic lesion length measurement on stent length selection: ramifications for stent savings. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2015;16:348–350.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costa MA, Angiolillo DJ, Tannenbaum M, et al. Impact of stent deployment procedural factors on long-term effectiveness and safety of sirolimus-eluting stents (final results of the multicenter prospective STLLR trial). Am J Cardiol. 2008;101:1704–1711.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Granada JF, Delgado JA, Uribe MP, et al. First-in-human evaluation of a novel robotic-assisted coronary angioplasty system. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4:460–465.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weisz G, Metzger DC, Caputo RP, et al. Safety and feasibility of robotic percutaneous coronary intervention: PRECISE (Percutaneous Robotically-Enhanced Coronary Intervention) Study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:1596–1600.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beyar R, Gruberg L, Deleanu D, et al. Remote-control percutaneous coronary interventions: concept, validation, and first-in-humans pilot clinical trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47:296–300.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahmud E, Naghi J, Ang L, et al. Demonstration of the safety and feasibility of robotically assisted percutaneous coronary intervention in complex coronary lesions: results of the CORA-PCI study (Complex Robotically Assisted Percutaneous Coronary Intervention). JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017;10:1320–1327.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Madder RD, VanOosterhout SM, Jacoby ME, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention using a combination of robotics and telecommunications by an operator in a separate physical location from the patient: an early exploration into the feasibility of telestenting (the REMOTE-PCI study). EuroIntervention. 2017;12:1569–1576.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahmud E, Pourdjabbar A, Ang L et al. Efficacy and safety outcomes of radial- vs femoral-access robotic percutaneous coronary intervention: final results from the multicenter precision registry. Presented at SCAI 2017 Scientifc Sessions on Friday May 12, 2017, 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Mahmud E, Schmid F, Kalmar P, et al. Feasibility and safety of robotic peripheral vascular interventions: results of the RAPID trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9:2058–2064.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dominguez A 3rd, Bahadorani J, Reeves R, et al. Endovascular therapy for critical limb ischemia. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther. 2015;13:429–444.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weisz G, Smilowitz NR, Metzger DC, et al. The association between experience and proficiency with robotic-enhanced coronary intervention-insights from the PRECISE multi-center study. Acute Card Care. 2014;16:37–40.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Caputo R, Lesser A, Fischi M, et al. Safety and feasibility of robotic PCI utilizing radial arterial access. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65:S0735-1097(15)60203-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheets JD, Wohns DH, Jacoby MSM, et al. TCT 108: initial clinical experience performing robotic percutaneous coronary intervention from the radial approach. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;66:B55.
   Google Scholar
• Kapur V, Smilowitz NR, Weisz G. Complex robotic-enhanced percutaneous coronary intervention. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;83:915–921.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahmud E, Dominguez A, Bahadorani J. First-in-human robotic percutaneous coronary intervention for unprotected left main stenosis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;88:565–570.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Behnamfar O, Pourdjabbar A, Yalvac E, et al. First case of robotic percutaneous vascular intervention for below-the-knee peripheral arterial disease. J Invasive Cardiol. 2016;28:E128–131.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bismuth J, Kashef E, Cheshire N, et al. Feasibility and safety of remote endovascular catheter navigation in a porcine model. J Endovasc Ther. 2011;18:243–249.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riga CV, Bicknell CD, Hamady MS, et al. Evaluation of robotic endovascular catheters for arch vessel cannulation. J Vasc Surg. 2011;54:799–809.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bismuth J, Duran C, Stankovic M, et al. A first-in-man study of the role of flexible robotics in overcoming navigation challenges in the iliofemoral arteries. J Vasc Surg. 2013;57:14S–19S.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duran C, Lumsden AB, Bismuth J. A randomized, controlled animal trial demonstrating the feasibility and safety of the Magellan endovascular robotic system. Ann Vasc Surg. 2014;28:470–478.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riga CV, Bicknell CD, Rolls A, et al. Robot-assisted fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) using the Magellan system. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2013;24:191–196.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rolls AE, Riga CV, Bicknell CD, et al. Robot-assisted uterine artery embolization: a first-in-woman safety evaluation of the Magellan System. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2014;25:1841–1848.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cochennec F, Kobeiter H, Gohel M, et al. Feasibility and safety of renal and visceral target vessel cannulation using robotically steerable catheters during complex endovascular aortic procedures. J Endovasc Ther. 2015;22:187–193.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rippel RA, Rolls AE, Riga CV, et al. The use of robotic endovascular catheters in the facilitation of transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2014;45:836–841.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazomenos EB, Chang PL, Rippel RA, et al. Catheter manipulation analysis for objective performance and technical skills assessment in transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2016;11:1121–1131.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adler-Milstein J, Kvedar J, Bates DW. Telehealth among US hospitals: several factors, including state reimbursement and licensure policies, influence adoption. Health Aff (Millwood). 2014;33:207–215.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer BC, Raman R, Hemmen T, et al. Efficacy of site-independent telemedicine in the STRokE DOC trial: a randomised, blinded, prospective study. Lancet Neurol. 2008;7:787–795.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marescaux J, Leroy J, Rubino F, et al. Transcontinental robot-assisted remote telesurgery: feasibility and potential applications. Ann Surg. 2002;235:487–492.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anvari M, McKinley C, Stein H. Establishment of the world’s first telerobotic remote surgical service: for provision of advanced laparoscopic surgery in a rural community. Ann Surg. 2005;241:460–464.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smilowitz NR, Moses JW, Sosa FA, et al. Robotic-enhanced PCI compared to the traditional manual approach. J Invasive Cardiol. 2014;26:318–321.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar