Marc D Moisi1, Kimberly Hoang2, R Shane Tubbs3, Jeni Page4, Christian Fisahn5, David Paulson4, Shiveindra Jeyamohan4, Johnny Delashaw4, David Hanscom4, Rod J Oskouian4, Jens Chapman4. 1. Swedish Neuroscience Institute, Swedish Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, USA; Seattle Science Foundation, Seattle, Washington, USA. Electronic address: moisimd@aol.com. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 3. Seattle Science Foundation, Seattle, Washington, USA. 4. Swedish Neuroscience Institute, Swedish Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, USA. 5. Swedish Neuroscience Institute, Swedish Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, USA; Seattle Science Foundation, Seattle, Washington, USA; Department of Trauma Surgery, BG University Hospital Bergmannsheil, Ruhr University, Bochum, Germany.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The operating microscope (OM) has become instrumental in aiding surgeons during key microdissection with greater safety and detail. An exoscope offers similar detail with improved functionality and greater implications for live teaching and improved operating room flow. METHODS: Eleven senior neurosurgery residents and fellows performed unilateral, single-level laminotomies on fresh cadavers using an OM and exoscope. Three attending spine surgeons blinded for the visualization technique used then reviewed and graded each decompression. Data points gathered included time of procedure, grading of decompression (1-5), and complications, including dural tear, nerve root injury, and pars fracture. RESULTS: Operative times between the 2 systems were not significantly different (14.9 minutes OM vs. 15.6 minutes exoscope, P = 0.766). Despite high variability between evaluators in assessing complications and adequacy of decompression, there was no significant difference between either system. Postprocedural surveys indicated greater comfort with the exoscope, greater ease of use, and superior teaching potential for the exoscope over the standard OM. CONCLUSION: In our simulated operating room model, an exoscope is a valid alternative to the standard OM that affords the surgeon greater comfort with greater teaching potential while maintaining many of the microscope's benefits.
INTRODUCTION: The operating microscope (OM) has become instrumental in aiding surgeons during key microdissection with greater safety and detail. An exoscope offers similar detail with improved functionality and greater implications for live teaching and improved operating room flow. METHODS: Eleven senior neurosurgery residents and fellows performed unilateral, single-level laminotomies on fresh cadavers using an OM and exoscope. Three attending spine surgeons blinded for the visualization technique used then reviewed and graded each decompression. Data points gathered included time of procedure, grading of decompression (1-5), and complications, including dural tear, nerve root injury, and pars fracture. RESULTS: Operative times between the 2 systems were not significantly different (14.9 minutes OM vs. 15.6 minutes exoscope, P = 0.766). Despite high variability between evaluators in assessing complications and adequacy of decompression, there was no significant difference between either system. Postprocedural surveys indicated greater comfort with the exoscope, greater ease of use, and superior teaching potential for the exoscope over the standard OM. CONCLUSION: In our simulated operating room model, an exoscope is a valid alternative to the standard OM that affords the surgeon greater comfort with greater teaching potential while maintaining many of the microscope's benefits.
Authors: Meng Huang; Sean Michael Barber; William James Steele; Zain Boghani; Viren Rajendrakumar Desai; Gavin Wayne Britz; George Alexander West; Todd Wilson Trask; Paul Joseph Holman Journal: J Robot Surg Date: 2017-06-27
Authors: Georgios Pafitanis; Michalis Hadjiandreou; Alexander Alamri; Christopher Uff; Daniel Walsh; Simon Myers Journal: Arch Plast Surg Date: 2020-05-15
Authors: Anna L Roethe; Philipp Landgraf; Torsten Schröder; Martin Misch; Peter Vajkoczy; Thomas Picht Journal: Acta Neurochir (Wien) Date: 2020-05-19 Impact factor: 2.216
Authors: Evgenii G Belykh; Xiaochun Zhao; Claudio Cavallo; Michael A Bohl; Kaan Yagmurlu; Joseph L Aklinski; Vadim A Byvaltsev; Nader Sanai; Robert F Spetzler; Michael T Lawton; Peter Nakaji; Mark C Preul Journal: Cureus Date: 2018-07-30