
Photograph by Jamie Chung | Prop Styling by Bryan Byrn
<< half man, half machine >>
One of the paradoxes of modern medicine is that it demands continual innovation yet often resists change. This is particularly true for highly complex surgeries, such as open-heart operations. After all, the traditional procedure works. Why change it? But Dr. Douglas Murphy, 59, a cardiac surgeon at St. Joseph's Hospital in Atlanta, has led the way in repairing the heart's mitral valve robotically, using Intuitive Surgical's da Vinci Surgical System. The procedure has proven more effective, quicker to do, and dramatically less invasive. Now he's on a mission to make it more widely adopted, providing a model for both high-tech surgery and remote medical education.
Murphy's achievements in the operating room are nothing short of miraculous to the rest of us. Instead of cutting the sternum and splitting open the chest, one of the more violent operations performed on the body, he inserts long, slender instruments, including a robotic camera, through a few fingertip-size incisions. Slipping the tremor-free instruments between the ribs, he's able to slice and enter the heart. "It's like building a ship in a bottle," he says. The camera gives him a three-dimensional, high-definition view (and magnification up to 10 times stronger than the human eye). The small size of the incisions nearly eliminates the risk of infection; there hasn't been one in 750 surgeries.
"Traditional heart surgery has always been a mixed blessing," Murphy says. "Sure, it's life-saving, but it takes you two or three months to recover. The heart recovers in a couple of hours. But the body takes much longer. With robotic surgery, the patient is out of the hospital in less than half the time and recovered in three weeks. I'm talking back to playing golf or tennis."
Why isn't robotic cardiac surgery already the treatment of choice? Murphy estimates that it takes 100 cases to learn to perform it efficiently, and there's no immediate financial incentive to do that since the reimbursement is the same. That means few surgeons -- let alone other members of the surgical team -- can afford to travel and observe an expert in action. What's necessary, Murphy realized, is robot college.
So earlier this year, his hospital launched the International College of Robotic Surgery, the first such remote facility with a cardiac focus. Murphy and his colleagues teach via a secure Internet site. Tuition runs as high as $100,000 for a comprehensive package that includes more than 30 presentations, live video feeds of operations, proctoring, and sessions tailored to each role on the surgical team -- surgeon, surgical assistant, nurse, anesthesiologist, and so on. "There are review sections, checklists, a section I call 'Things I wish I hadn't done,'" Murphy says. "We've documented 750 cases on video, so I can show it all -- the great examples, what's routine, what's not routine. They get the know-how of the first 100 cases before they do their first."
Murphy, who performed heart transplants before moving into less-invasive surgeries, teaches repair of the mitral valve -- a flap in the heart's upper chamber that can become leaky, leading to congestive heart failure. The optimal treatment is repairing the existing valve, but in nearly half of all nonrobotic procedures, surgeons install an artificial replacement, a considerably more expensive process. With robotics' 3-D magnification, Murphy is able to repair more than 90%. Dr. Sudhir Srivastava, who joined St. Joseph's from the University of Chicago Medical Center this year, teaches an even rarer robotic procedure: coronary bypass surgery on a beating heart.
Currently, hospitals around the world have more than 1,100 da Vinci systems, at a cost of $1 million to $1.7 million apiece. Using them more for cardiac procedures makes sense both medically and economically. The demand is there: Murphy has a two-month waiting list, with patients from all over. St. Joseph's, which has five da Vincis, has grown its total annual robotics-surgery revenue to $25.5 million from scratch in six years. And the need for less-invasive measures is expected to increase as the population ages, because traditional surgery is too traumatic for the elderly.
"We're toward the end of our careers, and we decided that rather than grind out more cases, we wanted to teach this worldwide," says Murphy. "Every major metropolitan area should have one or two teams that are proficient in this."
Last year, robotic surgery using the da Vinci system, the only one with FDA approval for soft-tissue surgery, reached a milestone: More than half of the 80,000 prostate removals in the United States were performed by surgeons manipulating robotic metallic arms instead of wielding scalpels in their own hands. A total of 136,000 operations involved da Vinci robots, a 60% increase from 2007. This revolution in the OR is likely to pick up speed as surgeons like Murphy and Srivastava perfect new robotic procedures -- and exploit telemedicine technology to share that knowledge efficiently.
Recent Comments | 17 Total
April 16, 2009 at 10:25am by Jim Jones
Added to EHRLinks.com
April 17, 2009 at 11:32pm by Bruce Brown
Telemedicine is the way of the future -- cheap and fast. If you live in NY check out www.swiftmd.com!
April 20, 2009 at 1:52am by David Wagoner
True the platform is important, but more important is the willingness of physicians and patients to change the system. The transformation comes from technology applied to meet real needs. Read more at: http://www.healdeal.com/blog/?p=33
April 21, 2009 at 3:52pm by Rob Lightner
This is exciting stuff! I've been using HealthVault ( http://www.healthvault.com/Personal/index.html ) for a while and I think this is finally enabling us to take control of our healthcare in the same way we have more control over our finances, real estate decisions, etc. It's good to see positive change instead of inertia.
April 25, 2009 at 11:13am by STEVEN TUCKER
I love the concept and have been doing e-medicine now for 10 years but remain skeptical about long term and universal success. The problems are both massive (the presumption that care should be free and universal) and minute (addressing protectionist laws about e-health prescribing and practicing across state lines or countries). Also, the solution described perpetuates and confirms the status quo without addressing fundamental change in personal responsibility for health and wellness. I worry that these models only become virtual urgent care clinics without support or vision for prevention. @drsteventucker
April 30, 2009 at 3:14pm by Joel DeJong
The Hello Health model brings convenience and affordability to primary
care via the internet without sacrificing the doctor patient
relationship. It also provides an alternative to general insurance
coverage which is currently costing my family of four over $800/month.
Being self-employed, I need alternatives. With Parkinson's model I
would be able to pay for affordable care when I need it and get
catastrophic coverage for under $200/month. Thank you Jay for
bringing primary care into the 21st Century.
April 30, 2009 at 3:17pm by Joel DeJong
Great Article! The Hello Health model brings convenience and affordability to primarycare via the internet without sacrificing the doctor patient relationship. It also provides an alternative to general insurance coverage which is currently costing my family of four over $800/month. Being self-employed, I need alternatives. With Parkinson's model I would be able to pay for affordable care when I need it and get
catastrophic coverage for around $200/month. Thank you Jay for
bringing primary care into the 21st Century.
May 3, 2009 at 1:21pm by Helen K
This service only offers a decent alternative for the healthcare needs of affluent young people. If the trend catches on and competition drives costs down for this type of health care service, maybe this will become more affordable for more people.
It drives away the insurance hassle for doctors and patients alike but it preserves the same philosophy of insurers. The doctors help most those who need help least, and getting rich thereby. So it's basically just another bloodthirsty vampire scheme, hardly the innovative solution we need in the national healthcare crisis we are experiencing today.
May 8, 2009 at 1:05am by House Doc
Technology by itself is no panacea. It could make things more complicated and difficult if not used properly. Health vault, for example, would be pretty useless if its packed with hundreds of pages of irrelevant details, as is the case with hospital records nowadays. Technology can help make the system more efficient, however, as for example, using the on line service www.housedoc.us to communicate with the doctor by email instead of by phone.
May 8, 2009 at 1:05am by House Doc
Technology by itself is no panacea. It could make things more complicated and difficult if not used properly. Health vault, for example, would be pretty useless if its packed with hundreds of pages of irrelevant details, as is the case with hospital records nowadays. Technology can help make the system more efficient, however, as for example, using the on line service www.housedoc.us to communicate with the doctor by email instead of by phone.
July 13, 2009 at 3:19pm by Ken Fyre
More doctors are circumventing the entire health care system and coming up innovative business models to help their practice. Gone is the sole reliance on insurance based business models where patients are herding in the door and herded out like cattle. Does doctors who do house calls or those with flat-rate pricing often are paid directly by their clients and hence the doctors practice more preventive medicine.
Doctor Reviews
September 29, 2009 at 3:08pm by Jack Bronson
Thanks for an amazing article. It is really a big issue nowadays in the United States. Maybe, after Obama’s health care reform, things will get better. For example, just few weeks ago I was trying to pass some medical tests at the local hospital, but when I saw prices, it was a real shock for me. More than a half thousand dollars for simple procedures. It is not a good at all.
Those ideas about e-hospitals look very interesting. I would be pleased to have a conversation with my doctor through the internet. Moreover, I would have a chance to look through my test results or diagnoses any time I want to. In conclusion, I want to say that this article presents some really great solutions for our health care system, so I want to thank one more time to the author.
Sincerely,
Jack Slighton from no prescription pharmacy
September 29, 2009 at 3:10pm by Jack Bronson
Thanks for an amazing article. It is really a big issue nowadays in the United States. Maybe, after Obama’s health care reform, things will get better. For example, just few weeks ago I was trying to pass some medical tests at the local hospital, but when I saw prices, it was a real shock for me. More than a half thousand dollars for simple procedures. It is not a good at all.
Those ideas about e-hospitals look very interesting. I would be pleased to have a conversation with my doctor through the internet. Moreover, I would have a chance to look through my test results or diagnoses any time I want to. In conclusion, I want to say that this article presents some really great solutions for our health care system, so I want to thank one more time to the author.
Sincerely,
Jack Slighton from no prescription pharmacy
September 30, 2009 at 1:25pm by Marry Lohlin
Sometimes it looks like that everyone is complaining about health care problems now, but I don't see any problem here. Yes, we are paying a lot for our health, but I don't agree that the quality of our health care system is poor. I would say that it is the best in the whole world. I am traveling a lot, I was in Europe, South America, Asia, and I didn't see any hospital which would have such a high quality of medicine as we have. They sometimes lack simple vaccination or simple things that are the MUST for health care problems nowadays. So the conclusion is that we want to pay less money for better health care? It sounds like the Utopian idea. But we will wait and see what Obama's health care reform will provide us. Good luck to everyone and thanks for the great and interesting article!
Marry Lohlin from letrozole
November 3, 2009 at 9:47am by Andrew Eriksen
@mary I agree with you, our healthcare system overall is actually great. I know that if I was to get sick, I can actually trust my doctors to make good decisions on behalf of my health. The confidence I have in the competency of our doctors is worth a lot of money. There are many things that can be fixed but an overall at the proposed scale is just not logical at this time for our country. We should take a history lesson and look back at other government ventures of this magnitude. They were always on the heels of economic woes and always far exceeded the initial estimates. I think that we need to slow down and take our time to create a comprehensive healthcare reform package that will solve many problems. The proposed plan is a patch work plan only designed to mend the system and satisfy the desire of the administration to pass healthcare reform.
--
Andrew Eriksen, CEO
Physician Practice Management Services
http://freeEMRsolution.com EMR Reviews & Free Solutions
http://PhysicianCredentialingServices.com Practice Start Up Assistance
November 5, 2009 at 2:04pm by Eric Sandler
This is the future of medicine.
To Quit Smoking | Stroke Treatment | Online Cricket Games
November 22, 2009 at 1:46pm by Benetta Anthony
Nice post I Like your site very well and continue to do so. I have bookmarked your site.