| Literature DB >> 35813650 |
Hsin-Yi Tseng1, Tzu-Yen Huang1, Yi-Chu Lin1, Jia Joanna Wang1,2, How-Yun Ko1, Cheng-Hsun Chuang1, I-Cheng Lu3, Pi-Ying Chang4, Gregory W Randolph5, Gianlorenzo Dionigi6,7, Ning-Chia Chang1,2, Che-Wei Wu1.
Abstract
Objectives: Quantum molecular resonance (QMR) devices have been applied as energy-based devices in many head and neck surgeries; however, research on their use in thyroid surgery is lacking. This study aimed to investigate the safety parameters of QMR devices during thyroidectomy when dissection was adjacent to the recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN).Entities:
Keywords: intraoperative neuromonitoring (IONM); porcine model safety parameters; quantum molecular resonance (QMR) devices; recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN); thyroid surgery
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35813650 PMCID: PMC9260785 DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2022.924731
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) ISSN: 1664-2392 Impact factor: 6.055
Figure 1Equipment setting and animal setting. (A) Setup of the continuous intraoperative neuromonitoring (C-IONM) system with the Nerve Integrity Monitor (NIM 3.0) system and Quantum generator system (MX 90, Telea Engineering, Vicenza, Italy). (B) Neck wound exposure with automated periodic stimulation (APS) placed on the vagus nerve (VN). The quantum molecular resonance (QMR) bipolar scissor (BS) and monopolar unit (MU) are shown.
Figure 2QMR BS activation study protocols. (A) Flowcharts of the QMR BS activation study. (B) QMR BS was tested at a distance of 5 mm from the left RLN. (C) EMG recording of the left side RLN in Piglet 2 under C-IONM. The QMR BS was activated at distances of 5, 2, and 1 mm. After activation at 1 mm, the EMG showed sudden 84.5% EMG signal loss without recovery after 30 minutes of observation.
Figure 3QMR MU activation study protocols. (A) Flowcharts of the QMR MU activation study. (B) QMR MU was tested at a distance of 5 mm from the left RLN. (C) EMG recording of the left side RLN in Piglet 4 under C-IONM. The QMR MU was activated at distances of 5, 2, and 1 mm. After activation at 1 mm, the EMG showed a sudden 83.0% EMG signal loss without recovery after 30 minutes of observation.
Figure 4QMR BS cooling study protocols. (A) Flowchart of the QMR BS cooling study. (B) The open blade of QMR BS touched the left RLN. (C) EMG recording of the left side RLN in Piglet 6 under C-IONM. After a single activation on sternocleidomastoid (SCM) muscle, the cooling study was performed with 5 seconds, 2 seconds, immediately without muscle touch maneuver (MTM), and immediately with MTM. The EMG results showed no adverse effects. The EMG signal remained stable in repeated tests.
Figure 5QMR MU cooling study protocols. (A) Flowchart of the QMR MU cooling study. (B) The blade of the QMR MU touched the left RLN. (C) EMG recording of the left side RLN in Piglet 7 under C-IONM. After a single activation of the SCM muscle, the cooling study was performed for 5 seconds, 2 seconds, immediately without MTM, and immediately with MTM. The EMG results showed no adverse effects. The EMG signal remained stable in repeated tests.
Activation study: real-time EMG changes after QMR BS and QMR MU activation at varying distances to the RLN.
| Animal No. | Side | 5mm, amplitude [times] | 2mm, amplitude [times] | 1mm, amplitude [times] |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Left | Stable [3] | Stable [3] | 63.0% loss [1] |
EMG, electromyographic; QMR, Quantum molecular resonance; BS, bipolar scissor; MU, monopolar unit; RLN, recurrent laryngeal nerve; LOS, loss of signal.
Cooling study: real-time EMG changes after QMR BS and QMR MU activation and varying cooling time.
| Animal No. | Side | 5 seconds, amplitude [times] | 2 seconds, amplitude [times] | Immediately with MTM, amplitude [times] | Immediately without MTM, amplitude [times] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Left | Stable [3] | Stable [3] | Stable [3] | Stable [3] |
EMG, electromyographic; QMR, Quantum molecular resonance; BS, bipolar scissor; MU, monopolar unit; LOS, loss of signal.