Neurosurgical applications of the exoscope: from in vitro studies to real-life surgical use in selective dorsal rhizotomy

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Neurochirurgie Pub Date : 2024-09-14 DOI:10.1016/j.neuchi.2024.101586
{"title":"Neurosurgical applications of the exoscope: from in vitro studies to real-life surgical use in selective dorsal rhizotomy","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.neuchi.2024.101586","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The microscope has been the gold standard in neurosurgical practice due to its ability to magnify anatomical structures. However, it has limitations, including restricted visual fields and ergonomic challenges that can lead to surgeon fatigue and musculoskeletal issues. The exoscope is an emerging technology that may address these limitations by offering comparable magnification with improved ergonomics.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This study compares the traditional microscope (KINEVO 900) with a 3D digital exoscope (Aeos Digital Microscope) in visual field width, image sharpness, and ergonomic impact. Visual field assessments were conducted using millimeter paper at a fixed distance, while image sharpness was evaluated using graph paper with pins at different depths. Ergonomic evaluation involved simulating surgical positions using a spine anatomical model. The practical applicability was tested during Selective Dorsal Rhizotomy (SDR) procedures, comparing the surgeon's experience with both devices over 20 consecutive cases.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The exoscope provided a larger visual field (81.18 cm<sup>2</sup>) compared to the microscope's (54.10 cm<sup>2</sup>). Image sharpness was similar for both devices across various depths and zoom levels. Ergonomically, the exoscope allowed the surgeon to maintain a neutral posture while visualizing extreme angles, unlike the microscope, which required significant upper body movement. In SDR procedures, the exoscope improved surgeon comfort and interaction with the operating team, despite an initial learning curve.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The exoscope presents notable advantages in terms of visual field and ergonomics. The exoscope’s ability to facilitate better posture and team communication without compromising image quality makes it an addition to neurosurgical practice, as in SDR.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51141,"journal":{"name":"Neurochirurgie","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurochirurgie","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0028377024000572","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The microscope has been the gold standard in neurosurgical practice due to its ability to magnify anatomical structures. However, it has limitations, including restricted visual fields and ergonomic challenges that can lead to surgeon fatigue and musculoskeletal issues. The exoscope is an emerging technology that may address these limitations by offering comparable magnification with improved ergonomics.

Methods

This study compares the traditional microscope (KINEVO 900) with a 3D digital exoscope (Aeos Digital Microscope) in visual field width, image sharpness, and ergonomic impact. Visual field assessments were conducted using millimeter paper at a fixed distance, while image sharpness was evaluated using graph paper with pins at different depths. Ergonomic evaluation involved simulating surgical positions using a spine anatomical model. The practical applicability was tested during Selective Dorsal Rhizotomy (SDR) procedures, comparing the surgeon's experience with both devices over 20 consecutive cases.

Results

The exoscope provided a larger visual field (81.18 cm2) compared to the microscope's (54.10 cm2). Image sharpness was similar for both devices across various depths and zoom levels. Ergonomically, the exoscope allowed the surgeon to maintain a neutral posture while visualizing extreme angles, unlike the microscope, which required significant upper body movement. In SDR procedures, the exoscope improved surgeon comfort and interaction with the operating team, despite an initial learning curve.

Conclusions

The exoscope presents notable advantages in terms of visual field and ergonomics. The exoscope’s ability to facilitate better posture and team communication without compromising image quality makes it an addition to neurosurgical practice, as in SDR.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
外窥镜的神经外科应用:从体外研究到选择性背根切断术的实际手术应用
背景显微镜因其放大解剖结构的能力而成为神经外科手术的黄金标准。然而,显微镜也有其局限性,包括视野受限和人体工程学方面的挑战,这可能会导致外科医生疲劳和肌肉骨骼问题。本研究比较了传统显微镜(KINEVO 900)和三维数字外窥镜(Aeos 数字显微镜)在视野宽度、图像清晰度和人体工程学方面的影响。视野评估是在固定距离上使用毫米纸进行的,而图像清晰度则是在不同深度上使用带针的图形纸进行评估的。人体工学评估包括使用脊柱解剖模型模拟手术体位。在选择性背侧根切术(SDR)过程中对实际应用性进行了测试,比较了外科医生在 20 个连续病例中使用两种设备的经验。结果与显微镜的视野(54.10 平方厘米)相比,外窥镜的视野更大(81.18 平方厘米)。两种设备在不同深度和变焦程度下的图像清晰度相似。从人体工学角度来看,外窥镜允许外科医生在观察极端角度时保持中立姿势,而显微镜则不同,它需要大量的上半身移动。在 SDR 手术中,外窥镜提高了外科医生的舒适度以及与手术团队的互动,尽管初期学习曲线较长。外窥镜能够在不影响图像质量的情况下改善姿势和团队交流,因此可用于神经外科手术,如 SDR。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Neurochirurgie
Neurochirurgie 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
6.20%
发文量
100
审稿时长
29 days
期刊介绍: Neurochirurgie publishes articles on treatment, teaching and research, neurosurgery training and the professional aspects of our discipline, and also the history and progress of neurosurgery. It focuses on pathologies of the head, spine and central and peripheral nervous systems and their vascularization. All aspects of the specialty are dealt with: trauma, tumor, degenerative disease, infection, vascular pathology, and radiosurgery, and pediatrics. Transversal studies are also welcome: neuroanatomy, neurophysiology, neurology, neuropediatrics, psychiatry, neuropsychology, physical medicine and neurologic rehabilitation, neuro-anesthesia, neurologic intensive care, neuroradiology, functional exploration, neuropathology, neuro-ophthalmology, otoneurology, maxillofacial surgery, neuro-endocrinology and spine surgery. Technical and methodological aspects are also taken onboard: diagnostic and therapeutic techniques, methods for assessing results, epidemiology, surgical, interventional and radiological techniques, simulations and pathophysiological hypotheses, and educational tools. The editorial board may refuse submissions that fail to meet the journal''s aims and scope; such studies will not be peer-reviewed, and the editor in chief will promptly inform the corresponding author, so as not to delay submission to a more suitable journal. With a view to attracting an international audience of both readers and writers, Neurochirurgie especially welcomes articles in English, and gives priority to original studies. Other kinds of article - reviews, case reports, technical notes and meta-analyses - are equally published. Every year, a special edition is dedicated to the topic selected by the French Society of Neurosurgery for its annual report.
期刊最新文献
Awake microsurgical management of brain aneurysms: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis on rationale, safety and clinical outcomes. Decompressive craniectomy versus best medical treatment alone in patients with severe deep intracerebral hemorrhage: is severe disability always preferable to death? Systematic review and comparative analysis of endovascular and microsurgical management of giant ruptured fusiform mca aneurysms with illustrative cases. Percutaneous and Open Anterolateral Cordotomy for Intractable Cancer Pain: a Technical Note. Working towards understanding the natural history and treatment response of noncanonical IDH mutant astrocytomas
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1