Utility of digitally assisted vitreoretinal surgery systems (DAVS) for high-volume vitreoretinal surgery centre: a pilot study.

AIM: To compare the surgical experience and preferred imaging platform, between digitally assisted vitreoretinal surgery systems (DAVS) and analogue microscope (AM), for performing various surgical manoeuvres.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A questionnaire was used to evaluate the experience of surgeons who used DAVS for at least 6 months in the last 1 year.
RESULTS: Twenty-three surgeons, including 12 fellows, answered the questionnaire. Eighty-two per cent of surgeons got accustomed to DAVS in <10 surgeries. The higher magnification provided by DAVS was perceived as helpful by 87.0% surgeons. Seventy-eight per cent surgeons felt that DAVS provided a bigger field of view. Colours displayed on DAVS appeared unnatural to 39.1%. Difficulty using three-dimensional glasses over spectacles, asthenopia and dry eye symptoms while using DAVS were faced by 17.4%, 17.4% and 21.7% surgeons, respectively. Difficulty in frequent switching between DAVS and AM was faced by 30.4% surgeons. Difficulty in depth perception, hand-eye coordination and performance anxiety while using DAVS was faced by 43.5%, 21.7 % and 30.4 % surgeons, respectively. Majority consultants did not have any imaging platform preference for most posterior segment procedures, while majority fellows preferred DAVS. Majority surgeons preferred AM for anterior segment procedures and complicated situations like small pupil, corneal oedema and surgical surprise(s). Once the surgeons became accustomed to DAVS, none of them had to shift back to AM during any case.
CONCLUSION: It was easy to adapt to DAVS. DAVS was preferred for performing most posterior segment surgeries. Drawbacks like unnatural colours of the projected image and difficulty in performing anterior segment manoeuvres need to be addressed. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.