FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |   Search Term  Advanced Search

Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe

Previous Volume 350:2091-2092 May 13, 2004 Number 20 Next

	Since this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

	Full Text PDF PDA Full Text Purchase this article Add to Personal Archive Add to Citation Manager Notify a Friend E-mail When Cited E-mail When Letters Appear Related Article by The Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group PubMed Citation

Technological advances, which are followed by long periods of catch-up while clinicians learn how to use the new techniques appropriately, often precede true medical progress. Such certainly appears to be the case for minimally invasive surgery. Early on, surgeons were hampered by having to steady the laparoscope with one hand and look through a small lens while performing surgery with the other hand. Advances in laparoscopic surgery were facilitated by a series of innovations that allowed true video surgery, in which two surgeons work together with both hands to perform operations. In the late 1990s, surgeons began to use minimally . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Source Information

From the Department of Surgery, Duke University, Durham, N.C.

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Hu, J. C., Gu, X., Lipsitz, S. R., Barry, M. J., D'Amico, A. V., Weinberg, A. C., Keating, N. L. (2009). Comparative Effectiveness of Minimally Invasive vs Open Radical Prostatectomy. JAMA 302: 1557-1564 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Hu, J. C., Wang, Q., Pashos, C. L., Lipsitz, S. R., Keating, N. L. (2008). Utilization and Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Radical Prostatectomy. JCO 26: 2278-2284 [Abstract] [Full Text]