Robotic telestenting performance in transcontinental and regional pre‐clinical models
Ryan D. Madder, Stacie VanOosterhout, Jessica Parker, Kalyna Sconzert, Yao Li, Nicholas Kottenstette, Abigail Madsen, John‐Michael Sungur, Per Bergman
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study was conducted to evaluate the association of geographic distance with robotic telestenting performance by comparing performance measures in transcontinental and regional pre-clinical models of telestenting. BACKGROUND: Robotic telestenting, in which percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is performed on a remotely located patient, might improve PCI access, but has not been attempted over vast distances likely required to reach many underserved regions. METHODS: Telestenting performance was compared in regional (Boston to New York [206 miles]) and transcontinental (Boston to San Francisco [3,085 miles]) ex vivo models of telestenting, wherein a physician in Boston attempted robotic PCI on endovascular simulators in New York and San Francisco, respectively. PCI was attempted over both wired and fifth generation (5G)-wireless networks. Outcome measures included procedural success, procedural time, and perceived latency. RESULTS: Procedural success was achieved in 20 consecutive target lesions in the regional model and in 16 consecutive target lesions in the transcontinental model. The transcontinental model had a greater latency than the regional model over both wired (121.5 ± 2.4 ms vs. 67.8 ± 0.9 ms; p < .001) and 5G-wireless networks (162.5 ± 1.1 ms vs. 86.6 ± 0.6 ms; p < .001), but perceived latencies were graded "imperceptible" in all cases in both models. Transcontinental and regional models did not have significantly different procedural times over wired (4.1 ± 1.9 min vs. 9.0 ± 7.1 min; p = .051) or 5G-wireless (3.0 ± 0.6 vs. 6.3 ± 1.2; p = .36) networks. CONCLUSIONS: Transcontinental robotic manipulation of coronary devices is now possible and was not associated with adverse performance compared to robotic telestenting conducted regionally.