Daniela Diers1, Jacob Friedemann Fast1,2, Friedrich Götz3, Lüder Alexander Kahrs4,5, Simone Miller6, Michael Jungheim1, Martin Ptok1. 1. Department of Phoniatrics and Pediatric Audiology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. 2. Institute of Mechatronic Systems (imes), Leibniz Universität Hannover, Hannover, Germany. 3. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. 4. The Hospital for Sick Children, Centre for Image Guided Innovation and Therapeutic Intervention (CIGITI), Toronto, Canada. 5. Department of Mathematical and Computational Sciences, University of Toronto Mississauga, Mississauga, Canada. 6. Department of Phoniatrics and Pediatric Audiology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. miller.simone@mh-hannover.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aims to determine Euclidean distances between landmark structures in the larynx and pharynx to optimize endoscope shaft designs with regard to gentle and patient-oriented handling. METHODS: Four Euclidean distances between landmarks in the larynx and pharynx were analyzed based on CT data of 66 patients. Distance (1): labium inferius oris-posterior pharyngeal wall at the cervical vertebra C1 (atlas), anterior edge of the tuberculum anterius atlantis. Distance (2): posterior pharyngeal wall adjacent to C1-entrance of pyriform sinus. Distance (3): inferior edge of the uvula-superior edge of the epiglottis. Distance (4): base of the vallecula-posterior pharyngeal wall. The minimum angular field of view α required to observe the glottis with a rigid transoral laryngoscope was derived trigonometrically from distances (2) and (4). RESULTS: Average Euclidean distances measured: Distance (1): 90.7 mm ± 6.9 mm in men and 86.9 mm ± 5.9 mm in women. (2): 73.7 mm ± 13.4 mm and 56.2 mm ± 7.6 mm. (3): 25.2 mm ± 8.6 mm and 18.5 mm ± 6.8 mm. (4): 20.8 mm ± 4.6 mm and 16.5 mm ± 3.4 mm. α: 16.0° ± 3.9° and 16.6 ± 4.3°. CONCLUSIONS: As expected, statistically significant sex-related differences could be observed for distances (1)-(4). The results indicate that the length of transoral laryngoscopes should not be below 110 mm and that a minimum angular field of view of α = 17° is required to fully observe the laryngeal inlet.
PURPOSE: This study aims to determine Euclidean distances between landmark structures in the larynx and pharynx to optimize endoscope shaft designs with regard to gentle and patient-oriented handling. METHODS: Four Euclidean distances between landmarks in the larynx and pharynx were analyzed based on CT data of 66 patients. Distance (1): labium inferius oris-posterior pharyngeal wall at the cervical vertebra C1 (atlas), anterior edge of the tuberculum anterius atlantis. Distance (2): posterior pharyngeal wall adjacent to C1-entrance of pyriform sinus. Distance (3): inferior edge of the uvula-superior edge of the epiglottis. Distance (4): base of the vallecula-posterior pharyngeal wall. The minimum angular field of view α required to observe the glottis with a rigid transoral laryngoscope was derived trigonometrically from distances (2) and (4). RESULTS: Average Euclidean distances measured: Distance (1): 90.7 mm ± 6.9 mm in men and 86.9 mm ± 5.9 mm in women. (2): 73.7 mm ± 13.4 mm and 56.2 mm ± 7.6 mm. (3): 25.2 mm ± 8.6 mm and 18.5 mm ± 6.8 mm. (4): 20.8 mm ± 4.6 mm and 16.5 mm ± 3.4 mm. α: 16.0° ± 3.9° and 16.6 ± 4.3°. CONCLUSIONS: As expected, statistically significant sex-related differences could be observed for distances (1)-(4). The results indicate that the length of transoral laryngoscopes should not be below 110 mm and that a minimum angular field of view of α = 17° is required to fully observe the laryngeal inlet.
Authors: Sabine Donner; Sebastian Bleeker; Tammo Ripken; Martin Ptok; Michael Jungheim; Alexander Krueger Journal: J Med Imaging (Bellingham) Date: 2015-06-25
Authors: Emily Cox; Ahmad Ghasemloonia; Steven C Nakoneshny; Kourosh Zareinia; Mark Hudon; John T Lysack; Garnette R Sutherland; Joseph C Dort Journal: J Robot Surg Date: 2016-09-23
Authors: Y Inamoto; E Saitoh; S Okada; H Kagaya; S Shibata; M Baba; K Onogi; S Hashimoto; K Katada; P Wattanapan; J B Palmer Journal: J Oral Rehabil Date: 2015-04-18 Impact factor: 3.837
Authors: Tino Just; Eva Lankenau; Friedrich Prall; Gereon Hüttmann; Hans Wilhelm Pau; Konrad Sommer Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 3.325
Authors: J F Fast; K A Westermann; M-H Laves; M Jungheim; M Ptok; T Ortmaier; L A Kahrs Journal: Biomicrofluidics Date: 2020-08-07 Impact factor: 2.800