World neurosurgery · 2024
Intraoperative Telestration System in Endoscopic Transsphenoidal Surgery Contributes to Improved Surgical Safety and Efficient Surgical Education.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Tanaka Yoji, Abe Daisu, Inaji Motoki, Hara Shoko, Sakai Ryosuke, Maehara Taketoshi
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a "telestration" system in which the mentor annotates the view of the surgical field, for endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery (ETS).
METHODS: The use of telestration was evaluated for sellar floor-opening during ETS and for a task performed using ETS simulation training. During ETS, the mentor outlined the opening area of the sella turcica on the monitor and then the trainee surgeon opened the sella, either with the telestration displayed (telestration (+) group, n = 8) or without (telestration (-) group, n = 7). In the task using an ETS training model, 18 subjects were asked to touch the indicated targets with the forceps, once with the instructions given via telestration and once with verbal instructions only.
RESULTS: During ETS, the telestration (+) group had a significantly higher concordance rate between the planned bone window and actual bone window than the telestration (-) group (92.97 ± 4.16% vs. 77.57 ± 10.51%, P = 0.014). In the ETS model, the time required to finish the task was significantly less with telestration than with verbal instructions alone (P = 0.002). None of the subjects had errors when telestration was used, while subjects made an average of 0.33 ± 0.59 errors and had to re-listen to the instructions 0.27 ± 0.46 times when only verbal instructions were given.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of the telestration system during ETS facilitated the communication of the mentor's intentions to the trainee surgeon and contributed to safer, more accurate surgery. The system was also thought to be useful in reducing operative time.
METHODS: The use of telestration was evaluated for sellar floor-opening during ETS and for a task performed using ETS simulation training. During ETS, the mentor outlined the opening area of the sella turcica on the monitor and then the trainee surgeon opened the sella, either with the telestration displayed (telestration (+) group, n = 8) or without (telestration (-) group, n = 7). In the task using an ETS training model, 18 subjects were asked to touch the indicated targets with the forceps, once with the instructions given via telestration and once with verbal instructions only.
RESULTS: During ETS, the telestration (+) group had a significantly higher concordance rate between the planned bone window and actual bone window than the telestration (-) group (92.97 ± 4.16% vs. 77.57 ± 10.51%, P = 0.014). In the ETS model, the time required to finish the task was significantly less with telestration than with verbal instructions alone (P = 0.002). None of the subjects had errors when telestration was used, while subjects made an average of 0.33 ± 0.59 errors and had to re-listen to the instructions 0.27 ± 0.46 times when only verbal instructions were given.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of the telestration system during ETS facilitated the communication of the mentor's intentions to the trainee surgeon and contributed to safer, more accurate surgery. The system was also thought to be useful in reducing operative time.