Robots Around Le Monde

I introduce this persuasion from French Republic courtesy of patient security together with character proficient The article is past times Professor Abdel Rahmène Azzouzi, Chief of Urology of the University Hospital of Angers.

Here are Google-assisted translations of some fundamental excerpts:

For over ten years now, proponents of robotic surgery bombard shameless untruths about the value of surgical robots in their field. As Ezekiel J. Emanuel said, a quondam adviser on wellness to the White House and a columnist for the New York Times, this pseudo-innovation increases costs without improving quality of aid (New York Times, May 27, 2012 ).  

Given the lack of evidence of the superiority of robotic techniques in the prostate removal surgery, how tin nosotros non question the inertia of regional wellness agencies (ARS), the Council of the College of Physicians and the French Association of Urology, who prefer not to offend, for reasons that escape us, the holders of an innovation with questionable benefit to the patient.  

The overly commercial strategy of Intuitive Surgical - the monopoly on this robotic technology with its model Da Vinci - is shocking in health aid and particularly affecting patients with cancer.

In its approach to its surgeon customers, it is only a inquiry of increasing the lay out of cases for surgery by attracting psychologically fragile patients at the proclamation of their disease and touting their results they do not have scientific proof. In other words, if the Da Vinci robot was a drug, it would never have obtained authorization to market.

For their part, supporters of the robot, having invested in the gild of 2 to 2.5 meg euros to laid out this surgical tool, betting on a render on investment by increasing the number of procedures, which in the case cancer localized prostate would increment the stock of patients operated incorrectly or prematurely. This irresponsible move strengthens the opponents of screening for prostate cancer, together with delay the character of the management of the disease. 

A Republican practice of medicine as expected in France must ensure that patients' interests and those of the community are always higher than the activity of so-called "expert" centers, in price of fame and financial benefits .

Given the lack of rigorous evaluation today and to better protect patients from a natural attraction to new technologies, our advice to all patients who are diagnosed with prostate cancer . . . is to live on vigilant before a proposal to remove the prostate, especially in centers with a robot, and to ensure that all available treatment options has been offered to them.

In other words and as stipulated in Article 35 of the Code of Public Health, the MD must provide clear and honest information, and furnish proper care to his patients.

Therapeutic innovation, when it is real, is essential to the evolution of medical practice, but it is only if it is dedicated to the patient, and not to those who support it or to manufacturers who are at the origin.

Share this post