Michael Z Lerner1, Michael Tricoli2, Marshall Strome2. 1. Montefiore Medical Center, Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Bronx, New York, USA. Electronic address: michlern@montefiore.org. 2. Medrobotics Corporation, Raynham, MA, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to determine if a flexible robotic system caused increased tissue reaction when accessing the oropharynx and hypopharynx compared to intubation controls in only 2 scenarios: high speed tissue impact and multiple unit insertions and retractions. The data obtained were submitted as part of the entirety of information submitted for FDA approval. METHODS: This study consisted of 5 groups of Yorkshire pigs (2 animals per group). On Day 0, all animals were intubated. For group 1 (control), a second endotracheal tube was advanced to just above the vocal cords. In abrasion groups 2 and 3, the flexible robotic system was advanced against the oropharyngeal and hypopharyngeal tissues, respectively. In blunt trauma groups 4 and 5, the flexible robotic system was advanced at maximum speed (22mm/s) to collide with oropharyngeal and hypopharyngeal tissues, respectively. Pre- and post-procedure endoscopic assessments of tissue reaction were performed daily for 4 days. An independent reviewer graded tissue reaction using a 0-3 point scale. RESULTS: Tissue reaction scores at each observation time point for all test groups were less than or equal to control scores except for one instance of moderate scoring (2 out of 3) on Day 2 for an animal in the blunt trauma group where reaction was likely intubation-related rather than device impact related. Otherwise, all flexible robotic system-treated animal scores were less than 1 by Day 4. CONCLUSIONS: In this limited study, the flexrobotic system afforded surgical access to the oropharynx and hypopharynx without an increased level of abrasion or tissue trauma when compared to intubation alone.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to determine if a flexible robotic system caused increased tissue reaction when accessing the oropharynx and hypopharynx compared to intubation controls in only 2 scenarios: high speed tissue impact and multiple unit insertions and retractions. The data obtained were submitted as part of the entirety of information submitted for FDA approval. METHODS: This study consisted of 5 groups of Yorkshire pigs (2 animals per group). On Day 0, all animals were intubated. For group 1 (control), a second endotracheal tube was advanced to just above the vocal cords. In abrasion groups 2 and 3, the flexible robotic system was advanced against the oropharyngeal and hypopharyngeal tissues, respectively. In blunt trauma groups 4 and 5, the flexible robotic system was advanced at maximum speed (22mm/s) to collide with oropharyngeal and hypopharyngeal tissues, respectively. Pre- and post-procedure endoscopic assessments of tissue reaction were performed daily for 4 days. An independent reviewer graded tissue reaction using a 0-3 point scale. RESULTS: Tissue reaction scores at each observation time point for all test groups were less than or equal to control scores except for one instance of moderate scoring (2 out of 3) on Day 2 for an animal in the blunt trauma group where reaction was likely intubation-related rather than device impact related. Otherwise, all flexible robotic system-treated animal scores were less than 1 by Day 4. CONCLUSIONS: In this limited study, the flexrobotic system afforded surgical access to the oropharynx and hypopharynx without an increased level of abrasion or tissue trauma when compared to intubation alone.
Authors: Francesco Barbara; Francesco Cariti; Valentina De Robertis; Michele Barbara Journal: Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital Date: 2021-02 Impact factor: 2.124