Suppliers and a surgeon evaluate the potential of the systems.
Both Sides of 4K
By Rebecca Rudolph-Witt, editor
Although enhanced visualization
systems offer some benefits for open
procedures, they are intended for
laparoscopic and endoscopic procedures, especially as the later has
evolved into a therapeutic tool. The
3D systems have been available for a
few years and have found a niche in
training and robotic procedures. But,
the launch of 4K in the past year has
brought larger screens with four times
the resolution into operating rooms.
The corresponding scopes, cameras,
recorders and connectivity systems
have followed, meaning for the first
time surgical teams are able to see
true 4K images, not just high-definition
(HD) images enhanced to 4K quality.
Because these systems are
so new, clinical data has yet to
be published and objective, peer
reviewed studies with large research
segments are even further out.
Suppliers anticipate this data will
start to emerge early this summer.
For now, the arguments for 4K
1. A larger, more detailed image will
improve outcomes and efficiency
by providing the surgeon and their
team with more information.
2. Enhanced color will allow
surgeons to observe fine patterns
and tissue in the body in high
precision, often associated with
3. The 4K screen can be structured
as a quadra-screen, offering four,
high-definition images within the
surgeon’s line of site.
When data is published supporting
these three points, it is hard to imagine there would not be a shift to 4K.
Until then, suppliers will be answering
question from skeptics. To hear both
“It is like taking a
being able to zoom
in four times (while
maintaining) that super
sharp focus, which you
could not do with HD.”
Evan Krachman, Sony
(Courtesy of Olympus)