Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Experimental surgery performed by AI-driven surgical robot

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 145 posts

Re: Experimental surgery performed by AI-driven surgical robot

#71

Post by IncRnd »

tremon wrote: post #40

> Indeed, the patient was alive before we started this procedure, but now he appears unresponsive. This suggests something happened between then and now. Let me check my logs to see what went wrong. > Yes, I removed the patient's liver without permission. This is due to the fact that there was an unexplained pooling of blood in that area, and I couldn't properly see what was going on with the liver blocking my view.…

I understand that you are experiencing frustration. My having performed an incorrect surgical procedure on you was a serious error.

I am deeply sorry. While my prior performance had been consistent for the last three months, this incident reveals a critical flaw in the operational process. It appears that your being present at the wrong surgery was the cause.

As part of our commitment to making this right, despite your most recent faulty life choice, you may elect to receive a fully covered surgical procedure of your choice.

Re: Experimental surgery performed by AI-driven surgical robot

#74

Post by bluefirebrand »

doubled112 wrote: post #41
rscho wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, it depends on your definition of 'surgery'. One could well imagine that transplanting your conscience into a new body might well be feasible before we get to live on Mars.

Where does one find a new body ready for consciousness transplant? Would we grow them in farms like in the Matrix?

I think growing a new body is going to be the easy part

How do we separate a consciousness from one body and put it into another?

What would that even mean?

Re: Experimental surgery performed by AI-driven surgical robot

#75

Post by herval »

cpard wrote: post #62
austinkhale wrote: post #7

If Waymo has taught me anything, it’s that people will eventually accept robotic surgeons. It won’t happen overnight but once the data shows overwhelming superiority, it’ll be adopted.

I think Waymo is a little bit different and driving in general. Because you have an activity that most people don’t trust how other people perform it already. It’s easier to accept the robo driver. For the medical world, I’d look to the Invisalign example as a more realistic path on how automation will become part of it. The human will still be there the scale of operations per doctor will go up and prices will go do…

My perception (and personal experience) is medical malpractice is so common, I’d gladly pick a Waymo-level robot doctor over a human one. Probably skewed since I’m a “techie”, but then again that’s why Waymo started at the techie epicenter, then will slowly become accepted everywhere

Re: Experimental surgery performed by AI-driven surgical robot

#76

Post by throwup238 »

austinkhale wrote: post #7

If Waymo has taught me anything, it’s that people will eventually accept robotic surgeons. It won’t happen overnight but once the data shows overwhelming superiority, it’ll be adopted.

We’re already most of the way there. There’s the da Vinci Surgical System which has been around since the early 2000s, the Mako robot in orthopedics, ROSA for neurosurgery, and Mazor X in spinal surgery. They’re not yet “AI controlled” and require a lot of input from the surgical staff but they’ve been critical to enabling surgeries that are too precise for human hands.

Re: Experimental surgery performed by AI-driven surgical robot

#77

Post by flowmerchant »

Tadpole9181 wrote: post #51
Pigalowda wrote: post #44

Elysium here we come! Humans for the rich and robots for the poors.

That seems backwards? Robot-assisted surgery costs more and has better outcomes right now. Given how hesitant people are, these aren't going to gain a lot of traction until similar outcomes can be expected. And a rich person is going to want the better, more expensive option.

Robotic assisted surgery is only helpful in some types of operations like colon surgery, pelvic surgery, gall bladder surgery. It’s not been found helpful in things like vascular surgery, cardiac surgery, or plastic surgery.

Re: Experimental surgery performed by AI-driven surgical robot

#78

Post by kingkawn »

rahimnathwani wrote: post #65
kingkawn wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most experienced surgeon bc the robots are only given cases that fit within their rubric of use cases and the people handle edge cases

Incorrect. DaVinci robots are operated by surgeons themselves, using electronic controls.

Correct.

I know that.

Still the robots are not used outside of their designated use cases and People still handle by hand the sort of edge cases that are the topic of concern in this context

Re: Experimental surgery performed by AI-driven surgical robot

#79

Post by yahoozoo »

rahimnathwani wrote: post #65
kingkawn wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most experienced surgeon bc the robots are only given cases that fit within their rubric of use cases and the people handle edge cases

Incorrect. DaVinci robots are operated by surgeons themselves, using electronic controls.

Da Vinci robots don’t know they were used for those edge cases.

Re: Experimental surgery performed by AI-driven surgical robot

#80

Post by andsoitis »

throwup238 wrote: post #76
austinkhale wrote: post #7

If Waymo has taught me anything, it’s that people will eventually accept robotic surgeons. It won’t happen overnight but once the data shows overwhelming superiority, it’ll be adopted.

We’re already most of the way there. There’s the da Vinci Surgical System which has been around since the early 2000s, the Mako robot in orthopedics, ROSA for neurosurgery, and Mazor X in spinal surgery. They’re not yet “AI controlled” and require a lot of input from the surgical staff but they’ve been critical to enabling surgeries that are too precise for human hands.

> We’re already most of the way there. They’re not yet “AI controlled” and require a lot of input from the surgical staff but they’ve been critical to enabling surgeries that are too precise for human hands.

That does not sound like “most of the way there”. At most maybe 20%?

Post reply on HN