European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2021
Introducing the High-definition 3D exoscope in ear surgery: preliminary analysis of advantages and limits compared with operative microscope.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Colombo Giovanni, Ferreli Fabio, Di Bari Matteo, Cugini Giovanni, Miceli Stefano, De Virgilio Armando, Spriano Giuseppe, Poletti Arturo
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the potential of 3D exoscope (EX) in selected ear procedures assessing if this new technology could be an improvement in the field of ear surgery.
METHODS: A case series of consecutive patients surgically treated with a post-auricular approach using EX was retrospectively compared with a similar previous series treated with operating microscope (OM). Patient demographics, indications for surgery, procedure type, complications, operating room setting time (ORst), operative time, adequacy of visualization, image quality, ergonomics aspects, instrument usability, and technique as a teaching tool were investigated. Thirteen patients were included in each group. Surgical procedures in EX group were nine tympanoplasties with mastoidectomy, 1 mastoidectomy for acute complicated mastoiditis, 1 revision miringoplasty, and 2 cochlear implants. Same types of procedures were enrolled in OM group.
RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found between the two groups concerning ORst and operative time. In EX group, one complication occurred--a middle cranial fossa cerebrospinal fluid leak. Advantages of EX were lightness, maneuverability and compactness, less need of endoscopy during surgery, and teaching potential. Limits were a need of a large surgical corridor and the bright structures rendering in high magnification.
CONCLUSION: EX resulted safe and efficient in treating diseases of the middle ear in post-auricular approaches. To date, EX advantages are not enough to abandon the OM, and it can be considered as an additional, innovative tool to be added to ear surgical equipment.
METHODS: A case series of consecutive patients surgically treated with a post-auricular approach using EX was retrospectively compared with a similar previous series treated with operating microscope (OM). Patient demographics, indications for surgery, procedure type, complications, operating room setting time (ORst), operative time, adequacy of visualization, image quality, ergonomics aspects, instrument usability, and technique as a teaching tool were investigated. Thirteen patients were included in each group. Surgical procedures in EX group were nine tympanoplasties with mastoidectomy, 1 mastoidectomy for acute complicated mastoiditis, 1 revision miringoplasty, and 2 cochlear implants. Same types of procedures were enrolled in OM group.
RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found between the two groups concerning ORst and operative time. In EX group, one complication occurred--a middle cranial fossa cerebrospinal fluid leak. Advantages of EX were lightness, maneuverability and compactness, less need of endoscopy during surgery, and teaching potential. Limits were a need of a large surgical corridor and the bright structures rendering in high magnification.
CONCLUSION: EX resulted safe and efficient in treating diseases of the middle ear in post-auricular approaches. To date, EX advantages are not enough to abandon the OM, and it can be considered as an additional, innovative tool to be added to ear surgical equipment.