Francesca Zappa1, Davide Mattavelli2, Alba Madoglio1, Vittorio Rampinelli2, Marco Ferrari2, Fabio Tampalini3, Marco Fontanella1, Piero Nicolai2, Francesco Doglietto4. 1. Neurosurgery, Department of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Radiological Sciences and Public Health, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy. 2. Otorhinolaryngology, Department of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Radiological Sciences and Public Health, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy. 3. Advanced Robotics Laboratory, Department of Information Engineering, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy; (4)Otorhinolaryngology, University of Insubria, Varese, Italy; (5)Neurosurgery, University of Insubria, Varese, Italy; (6)Neurosurgery, Henri Mondor University Hospital, Créteil, France; (7)Lariboisière University Hospital, Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Paris Diderot University, Paris, France. 4. Neurosurgery, Department of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Radiological Sciences and Public Health, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy. Electronic address: francesco.doglietto@unibs.it.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A robotic endoscope holder should theoretically provide various advantages in transnasal endoscopic skull base surgery, but only recently has a robotic system become commercially available. The objective of this study was to provide a preclinical evaluation of potential advantages and surgeon first impression of this robotic hybrid solution. METHODS:Thirty skull base surgeons, attending the Joint European Diploma of Endoscopic Skull Base Surgery 2018-2019 in Paris, France, were enrolled. A questionnaire, mainly concerning personal surgical experience and habits, was administered. The test phase consisted of 2 different dry-lab tasks, performed with and without EndoscopeRobot, according to randomization and on 2 different days. A modified NASA Task Load Index test was subsequently administered via e-mail to all participants. Completion times and modified Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills in Endoscopy scores of the videotaped tasks were recorded. RESULTS:Nineteen otorhinolaryngologic surgeons and 11 neurosurgeons, with different surgical habits and endoscopic experience, were enrolled. No one appeared unfavorable a priori to robotic endoscopic surgery. Although the robot did not provide an advantage in the simple grasping task 1, a trend toward better completion times and efficacy was evident in the bimanual task 2, when performed with the robot and bimanually. According to the modified NASA Task Load Index test, surgeons felt more successful with the robot in task 2, finding it less stressful and mentally demanding. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic skull base surgeons seem to view a hybrid robotic solution positively. EndoscopeRobot seems to provide a benefit to the single surgeon with experience in bimanual endoscopic surgery. Further preclinical and clinical evaluation of this technology is necessary.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: A robotic endoscope holder should theoretically provide various advantages in transnasal endoscopic skull base surgery, but only recently has a robotic system become commercially available. The objective of this study was to provide a preclinical evaluation of potential advantages and surgeon first impression of this robotic hybrid solution. METHODS: Thirty skull base surgeons, attending the Joint European Diploma of Endoscopic Skull Base Surgery 2018-2019 in Paris, France, were enrolled. A questionnaire, mainly concerning personal surgical experience and habits, was administered. The test phase consisted of 2 different dry-lab tasks, performed with and without EndoscopeRobot, according to randomization and on 2 different days. A modified NASA Task Load Index test was subsequently administered via e-mail to all participants. Completion times and modified Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills in Endoscopy scores of the videotaped tasks were recorded. RESULTS: Nineteen otorhinolaryngologic surgeons and 11 neurosurgeons, with different surgical habits and endoscopic experience, were enrolled. No one appeared unfavorable a priori to robotic endoscopic surgery. Although the robot did not provide an advantage in the simple grasping task 1, a trend toward better completion times and efficacy was evident in the bimanual task 2, when performed with the robot and bimanually. According to the modified NASA Task Load Index test, surgeons felt more successful with the robot in task 2, finding it less stressful and mentally demanding. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic skull base surgeons seem to view a hybrid robotic solution positively. EndoscopeRobot seems to provide a benefit to the single surgeon with experience in bimanual endoscopic surgery. Further preclinical and clinical evaluation of this technology is necessary.
Authors: Victor F Muñoz; Isabel Garcia-Morales; Juan Carlos Fraile-Marinero; Javier Perez-Turiel; Alvaro Muñoz-Garcia; Enrique Bauzano; Irene Rivas-Blanco; Jose María Sabater-Navarro; Eusebio de la Fuente Journal: Sensors (Basel) Date: 2021-03-26 Impact factor: 3.576