In minimally invasive surgery, surgeons use various ways to operate with less damage to the body than with open surgery. In general, minimally invasive surgery is linked to less pain, a shorter hospital stay and fewer complications. Laparoscopy is surgery done through one or more small cuts, called incisions, using small tubes and tiny cameras and surgical tools.

Laparoscopy was one of the first types of minimally invasive surgery. Another type of minimally invasive surgery is robotic surgery. It gives an enlarged, 3D view of the surgical site and helps the surgeon operate with precision and control.

Ongoing progress in minimally invasive surgery makes it a good option for people with a wide range of conditions. If you need surgery and think you may be able to have this approach, talk with your surgeon.

Types of minimally invasive surgery

Surgeons perform many minimally invasive surgeries on different parts of the body, including:

Minimally invasive surgery can also be used for more general surgeries, including the following:

Robotic heart surgery – What you should know and what you should ask

Joseph Dearani, M.D., Professor of Surgery, College of Medicine, Mayo Clinic: Hello. My name is Joseph Dearani, and I'm the Chair of Cardiovascular Surgery at the Mayo Clinic. And we're going to talk about robotic heart surgery. What you should know and what questions you should ask. So robotics is really the ultimate in minimally invasive surgery. There is no bone breaking and there's no significant muscle cutting. And the robot is really three arms that are an extension of the surgeon's hands. So actually we're not able to touch the heart. And success in robotic heart surgery really requires the cohesive team with a high volume of cases in order to optimize results. So the Mayo team includes a careful selection of cardiologists for the preoperative phase, and then a polished operating room team that consists of surgeons and technicians and anesthesia, and then critical care and allied health in the post-operative phase. And then after the patient leaves the hospital, we have communication with the home physician so continuity is maintained. Now importantly, in our program, we utilize two staff surgeons — one at the bedside and one at the console, and we feel that this is very, very important in terms of minimizing operating time, particularly on the heart-lung machine. The OR team, beyond the surgeons, consists of a cardiologist who is doing the echocardiogram and an anesthesiologist who is well versed with the minimally invasive techniques in the passage of catheters. Postoperatively, the anesthesia team does a hand-off to the critical care team. We have protocols that minimize time in the ICU, determines when lines and tubes are removed. Patients are cared for with competence and compassion and having a high volume of cases allows us to do this so that it becomes routine, which is very important for you.

Now the indications for robotic heart surgery generally revolve around mitral valve disease, although there are many other indications where it could be considered — tricuspid valve problems, small cardiac tumors (although they are not very common), selected congenital heart defects, septal defects (like atrial septal defect) and other structural problems that fall into the congenital arena. In addition, aspects of coronary bypass surgery can be done robotically or minimally invasively, and then selected arrhythmia procedures can also be done robotically.

Now there are some patients that are not able to have robotic heart surgery. If they need multiple procedures, particularly multiple valve procedures, or a combination of valve and coronary bypass surgery, it just may be too much to do with the robot. Patients that have had previous cardiac surgery or they've had a previous operation that involves an incision in the right chest, they are also not eligible for the robot at the current time. Patients who are very large, or morbidly obese, may also not be a candidate because of the limitations with the technology at the present time with the length of arms and such, related to the robot. Also, patients must not have significant peripheral vascular disease because in order to do this minimally invasively, we rely on attachment to the heart-lung machine utilizing vessels in the groin and in the neck.

Now with regard to mitral valve disease, generally speaking, the indications for surgery have historically revolved around the presence of symptoms — shortness of breath, decreased exercise tolerance or simple fatigue — and when the ventricular function has been going down, or the size of the heart has been enlarging, these have been traditional indications to transfer somebody for a surgical consultation. Importantly now, we have learned that mitral valve disease is one of the structural heart defects where the asymptomatic patient, in fact, should be referred for surgery. And this requires the presence of severe mitral regurgitation with some notice of heart enlargement and/or the onset of arrhythmias. And importantly, the probability of valve repair must be very high.

Now, some may ask, are there any technical compromises with doing this robotically? And importantly in our practice, we apply the gold standard open approach robotically and this is important for you as a patient to understand that we have not compromised on the operation that we are doing robotically. In fact, if we were to do it in an open manner, with a full incision, it would be the same exact operation. That is the gold standard for what we do. Some patients may ask, is it risky or is it safe? And, in fact, now we are approaching 600 robotic heart repairs, most of which have been mitral valve repair. Our repair rate fortunately, to date, has been 100%. And the mortality is exceedingly low, less than 1/2 of a percent. We've not had any conversions to an open procedure which is something that we always mention to patients in advance. But fortunately, with a cohesive team, we have not had to do this to date. Robotic times we have found are shorter from an overall length of stay in the hospital. The time on the ventilator is shorter. The time in the ICU is shorter. The time on the floor is shorter and the total hospital stay is roughly about three days. We have good solid five-year follow-up, now in almost 100% of the patients and the results have been very encouraging.

There are real advantages for you as a patient. First, you get the same operation whether it's done open or whether it's done robotically and the repair rate here exceeds 99%. There is less pain. There is less bleeding. There is less infection, and you're also less likely to have transient arrhythmias after surgery, which can be quite common with valvular heart disease. The length of hospital stay is short and the recovery is generally easier. The quality of life, we have learned, is better with the robotic approach. It's excellent with the open approach but you have an advantage having it done robotically in terms of all of these other favorable aspects. And there is earlier return to work. And many patients, depending upon the type of work they do, are able to return to work within two to three weeks of surgery. So the most important points for you to remember is that the outcome is similar to the open repair with the robotic approach. The technique of operation should be identical to the open operation. But it does require the presence of an elite, experienced team that includes cardiovascular surgery, cardiology, anesthesia, critical care and all of the many essential allied health care members. The length of stay is shorter, and the recovery year is easier, and the quality of life, in general, is improved, with an earlier time returning to work.

So what questions should you ask your surgeon or cardiologist if you're being considered for a robotic approach? First is, you should ask what the experience of the team is. And importantly, I think it's helpful to know what their experience is with the open operation, because programs that have extensive experience with the open operation generally have incredibly good results with the robotic approach because of all of the experience that they have accrued. What is the nature of the team, and who is doing what? It has been our practice to have two staff surgeons involved with each and every patient — one at the bedside and one at the console. Now while this is not mandatory, we do find it helpful. And at the very, very least, the team at the bedside needs to be very, very experienced in this niche area of cardiac surgery. All of this is important because outcome is generally related to the length of time in the operating room and most importantly the length of time on the heart-lung machine. So having experience reduces these time intervals which generally result in improved outcome. How many have been done totally in the program? And how many is the team doing each week? There needs to be some regularity with cases going on every week so that everybody stays versatile and experienced and comfortable with all of the nuance that surround this technology. How many have needed to be converted to an open procedure, and what has been the success rate both early and late?

I'm proud to work at Mayo Clinic and be part of this robotic heart team, and proud to be part of the whole cardiovascular surgery enterprise, in general. Thank you very much for listening.


Why it's done

Minimally invasive surgery came about in the 1980s as a safe way to meet the surgical needs of many people. In the last 20 years, many surgeons have come to prefer it to open, also called traditional, surgery. Open surgery most often needs larger cuts and a longer hospital stay.

Since then, the use of minimally invasive surgery has spread widely in many surgical areas, including colon surgery and lung surgery. Talk with your surgeon about whether minimally invasive surgery would be a good choice for you.


Minimally invasive surgery uses smaller surgical cuts, and most often is less risky than open surgery. But even with minimally invasive surgery, there are risks of complications with medicines that put you in a sleep-like state during surgery, bleeding and infection.

Clinical trials

Explore Mayo Clinic studies of tests and procedures to help prevent, detect, treat or manage conditions.

Minimally invasive surgery care at Mayo Clinic

Sept. 23, 2023
  1. AskMayoExpert. Endometrial cancer: Diagnosis through first treatment (or surgical staging) (adult). Mayo Clinic; 2022.
  2. Raffaelli M, et al. Laparoscopic adrenalectomy. Gland Surgery. 2019; doi:10.21037/gs.2019.06.07.
  3. Hu YX, et al. Esophageal hiatal hernia: Risk, diagnosis and management. Expert Review of Gastroenterology and Hepatology. 2018; doi:10.1080/17474124.2018.1441711.
  4. AskMayoExpert. Biliary stone disease. Mayo Clinic; 2022.
  5. AskMayoExpert. Acromegaly and gigantism. Mayo Clinic; 2022.
  6. Azagury D, et al. Surgical anti-reflux options beyond fundoplication. Current Gastroenterology Reports. 2017; doi:10.1007/s11894-017-0582-9.
  7. Bona R. Elective (diagnostic or therapeutic) splenectomy. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/search. Accessed May 9, 2023.
  8. Pryor AP, et al. Complications of laparoscopic surgery. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/search. Accessed May 9, 2023.
  9. Bednarski BK. Overview of colon resection. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/search. Accessed May 9, 2023.
  10. Sheng S, et al. Comparison of robot-assisted surgery, laparoscopic-assisted surgery, and open surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancer. Medicine. 2018; doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000011817.
  11. Navaratnam A, et al. Updates in urologic robot assisted surgery [version 1; peer review: 2 approved. F1000 Research. 2022; doi:10.12688/f1000research.15480.1.
  12. Broucek JR, et al. Minimally invasive approaches to pancreatic cancer. Surgical Oncology Clinics of North America. 2019; doi:10.1016/j.soc.2018.11.006.
  13. Han ES, et al. Safety in minimally invasive surgery. Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinics of North America. 2019; doi:10.1016/j.ogc.2019.01.013.
  14. Ami TR. Allscripts EPSi. Mayo Clinic. May 26, 2023.
  15. AskMayoExpert. Living donor nephrectomy (adult). Mayo Clinic; 2020.
  16. AskMayoExpert. Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lobectomy. Mayo Clinic; 2021.
  17. Lim RB. Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/search. Accessed May 9, 2023.
  18. AskMayoExpert. Knee replacement. Mayo Clinic; 2021.
  19. Hosn MA, et al. Visceral artery aneurysms: Decision making and treatment options in the new era of minimally invasive and endovascular surgery. International Journal of Angiology. 2019; doi:10.1055/s-0038-1676958.
  20. Promising results in minimally invasive brain surgery for epilepsy. Mayo Clinic. https://newsnetwork.mayoclinic.org/discussion/mayo-clinic-finds-promising-results-in-minimally-invasive-brain-surgery-for-epilepsy/. Accessed Aug. 9, 2021.
  21. Behbehani S, et al. Mortality rates in benign laparoscopic and robotic gyneologic surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology. 2019; doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2019.10.005.
  22. Alvi MA, et al. Operative approaches for lumbar disc herniation: A systematic review and multiple treatment meta-analysis of conventional and minimally invasive surgeries. World Neurosurgery. 2018; doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2018.02.156.
  23. Jackson C, et al. Minimally invasive biopsies of deep-seated brain lesions using tubular retractors under exoscopic visualization. Journal of Neurological Surgery Part A: Central European Neurosurgery. 2017; doi:10.1055/s-0037-1602698.

Minimally invasive surgery