Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2017 Jul 24;6(7):e006239.
doi: 10.1161/JAHA.117.006239.

Current and Future Use of Robotic Devices to Perform Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: A Review

Elad Maor  1 , Mackram F Eleid  1 , Rajiv Gulati  1 , Amir Lerman  1 , Gurpreet S Sandhu  2
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Current and Future Use of Robotic Devices to Perform Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: A Review

Elad Maor et al. J Am Heart Assoc. .
No abstract available

Keywords: Coronary Artery Disease; Medical Device; Percutaneous Coronary Interventions; Robotics.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Contemporary use of robotic percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The figure shows a real case of a 50‐year‐old man with unstable angina who was transferred to our catheterization laboratory in Rochester, Minnesota, from the emergency department and underwent successful PCI with drug‐eluting stent placement in the proximal left anterior descending artery. The procedure was performed through a radial approach (top left), with the consultant sitting in a protected environment controlling fluoroscopy and manipulating coronary wires, balloon and stent deployment (top right). The figure also shows how the wire and stent were inserted into the loading cassette (middle right) and how the interventional fellow and/or technician has to stay in the radiation field to inflate the balloon and deploy the stent (middle left). At the bottom, three real images and two illustrations show the proximal left anterior descending coronary lesion that was successfully treated with the robotic device. Final result is in the bottom right. Used with permission of Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research. All rights reserved.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Lendvay TS, Hannaford B, Satava RM. Future of robotic surgery. Cancer J. 2013;19:109–119. - PubMed
    1. Mihaljevic T, Jarrett CM, Gillinov AM, Williams SJ, DeVilliers PA, Stewart WJ, Svensson LG, Sabik JF III, Blackstone EH. Robotic repair of posterior mitral valve prolapse versus conventional approaches: potential realized. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2011;141:72–80.e4. - PubMed
    1. Srivastava S, Barrera R, Quismundo S. One hundred sixty‐four consecutive beating heart totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass cases without intraoperative conversion. Ann Thorac Surg. 2012;94:1463–1468. - PubMed
    1. Riga C, Bicknell C, Cheshire N, Hamady M. Initial clinical application of a robotically steerable catheter system in endovascular aneurysm repair. J Endovasc Ther. 2009;16:149–153. - PubMed
    1. Carrell T, Dastur N, Salter R, Taylor P. Use of a remotely steerable “robotic” catheter in a branched endovascular aortic graft. J Vasc Surg. 2012;55:223–225. - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources