the imperfections in a picture when it's zoomed in, but there are far
fewer imperfections in 4K. The picture is still very usable.
Dr. Renton: The curve ends up flattening. You can get a better picture
with 4K, but does it change anything you're going to do in the OR?
Does seeing at a cellular level help you that much during surgery?
Once you reach HD, the difference between it and ultra HD looks
incredible, but I don't think it changes much clinically. I'm not sure it's
worth investing thousands of dollars in a system that provides more
pixels.
Dr. Pryor: HD pictures are perfect. I have no need to upgrade my current
system. My biggest issues are keeping the laparoscope lens clean and
the cables in good working order. A lot of those maintenance issues
are so much more obvious and important with great optical systems.
Mr. Razavi: Video technology is accelerating and evolving incredibly
quickly. Look at innovations in broadcast television to gauge how far
surgical imaging has come, and where it's going in the near future. I
saw HD television in the 1980s, but it was close to 20 years later
before the technology was commonplace in the home. There's a long
lag time between when a technology is invented and when it becomes
practical to use. As soon as we saw HD television perfected for con-
sumers, it began to be adopted in the medical world.
The same goes for 4K. We're already installing the technology in
meeting rooms and ultra HD televisions have hit the consumer mar-
ket, so I'm confident it will be a regular part of medical imaging. I'd
expect to start building ultra HD into ORs in the next couple years,
when surgeons are happy with how the new 4K laparoscopes operate
and feel in their hands. When that happens, it'll be a done deal.
8 4 • O U T PA T I E N T S U R G E R Y M A G A Z I N E • J A N U A R Y 2 0 1 6
