Surgical video systems (SVSs), which typically consist of a video camera attached to an optical endoscope, a video processor, a light source, and a video monitor, are now being used to perform a significant number of minimally invasive surgical procedures. SVSs offer several advantages (e.g., multiple viewer visualization of the surgical site, increased clinician comfort) over nonvideo systems and have increased the practicality and convenience of minimally invasive surgery (MIS). Currently, SVSs are used by hospitals in their general, obstetric/gynecologic, orthopedic, thoracic, and urologic procedures, as well as in other specialties for which MIS is feasible. In this study, we evaluated 19 SVSs from 10 manufacturers, focusing on their use in laparoscopic applications in general surgery. We based our ratings on the usefulness of each system's video performance and features in helping clinicians provide safe and efficacious laparoscopic surgery. We rated 18 of the systems Acceptable because of their overall good performance and features. We rated 1 system Conditionally Acceptable because, compared with the other evaluated systems, this SVS presents a greater risk of thermal injury resulting from excessive heating at the distal tip of the laparoscope. Readers should be aware that our test results, conclusions, and ratings apply only to the specific systems and components tested in this Evaluation. In addition, although our discussion focuses on the laparoscopic application of SVSs, much of the information in this study also applies to other MIS applications, and the evaluated devices can be used in a variety of surgical procedures. To help hospitals gain the perspectives necessary to assess the appropriateness of specific SVSs to ensure that the needs of their patients, as well as the expectations of their clinicians, will be satisfied, we have included a Selection and Purchasing Guide that can be used as a supplement to our Evaluation findings. We have also included a Glossary of relevant terminology and the supplementary article, "Fiberoptic Illumination Systems and the Risk of Burns or Fire during Endoscopic Procedures," which addresses a safety concern with the use of these devices. While we made every effort to present the most current information, readers should recognize that this is a rapidly evolving technology, and developments occurring after our study was complete may not be reflected in the text. For additional information on topics related to this study, refer to the following Health Devices articles: (1) our Guidance Article, "Surgical Video Systems Used in Laparoscopy," 24(1), January 1995, which serves as an introduction to SVS terminology and includes a discussion of the significance of many SVS specifications; (2) our Evaluation, "Video Colonoscope Systems," 23(5), May 1994, which includes a detailed overview of video endoscopic applications and technology; and (3) our Evaluations of laparoscopic insufflators (21[5], May 1992, and 24[7], July 1995), which address issues related to the creation of a viewing and working space inside the peritoneal cavity to facilitate visualization in laparoscopic procedures.
手术视频系统(SVS)通常由连接在光学内窥镜上的摄像机、视频处理器、光源和视频监视器组成,目前正被用于大量的微创手术。与非视频系统相比,SVS具有多个优点(如手术部位的多视角可视化、提高临床医生的舒适度),并提高了微创手术(MIS)的实用性和便利性。目前,医院在普通外科、妇产科、骨科、胸科和泌尿外科手术中使用SVS,以及在其他可行MIS的专科中也使用。在本研究中,我们评估了来自10家制造商的19款SVS,重点关注它们在普通外科腹腔镜应用中的使用情况。我们根据每个系统的视频性能和功能在帮助临床医生提供安全有效的腹腔镜手术方面的有用性进行评分。由于整体性能和功能良好,我们将18款系统评为可接受。我们将1款系统评为有条件接受,因为与其他评估系统相比,这款SVS因腹腔镜远端尖端过热而导致热损伤的风险更大。读者应注意,我们的测试结果、结论和评级仅适用于本评估中测试的特定系统和组件。此外,尽管我们的讨论重点是SVS的腹腔镜应用,但本研究中的许多信息也适用于其他MIS应用,并且评估的设备可用于各种外科手术。为帮助医院获得评估特定SVS适用性所需的观点,以确保满足患者需求以及临床医生的期望,我们纳入了一份选择和购买指南,可作为我们评估结果的补充。我们还纳入了相关术语词汇表和补充文章《纤维光学照明系统与内镜手术期间烧伤或火灾风险》,该文章讨论了使用这些设备的安全问题。虽然我们尽最大努力提供最新信息,但读者应认识到这是一项快速发展的技术,我们的研究完成后出现的进展可能未在本文中体现。有关本研究相关主题的更多信息,请参考以下健康设备文章:(1)我们的指导文章《腹腔镜手术中使用的手术视频系统》,1995年1月第24卷第1期,作为SVS术语的介绍,并包括对许多SVS规格重要性的讨论;(2)我们的评估《视频结肠镜系统》,1994年5月第23卷第5期,其中包括视频内镜应用和技术的详细概述;(3)我们对腹腔镜充气器的评估(1992年5月第21卷第5期和1995年7月第24卷第7期),涉及与在腹膜腔内创建观察和工作空间以促进腹腔镜手术可视化相关的问题。