Pre-clinical Comparison of a High-Definition 3-Dimensional Exoscope and an Operating Microscope: A Prospective Randomized Crossover Study

A. De Virgilio, A. Costantino, B. M. Festa, F. Nicolosi, C. Ebm, G. Spriano, G. Mercante
{"title":"Pre-clinical Comparison of a High-Definition 3-Dimensional Exoscope and an Operating Microscope: A Prospective Randomized Crossover Study","authors":"A. De Virgilio, A. Costantino, B. M. Festa, F. Nicolosi, C. Ebm, G. Spriano, G. Mercante","doi":"10.52198/22.sti.40.so1583","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: The high-definition 3D operating exoscope is a new tool for surgical visualization and magnification that was designed to replace the operating microscope. However, the paucity of studies that have prospectively compared the two systems has made it difficult to draw clear recommendations. The purpose of this study was to compare the operating exoscope and the operating microscope in first-time users in a pre-clinical setting. Methods: Twenty-eight consecutive medical students were prospectively enrolled and randomized in a crossover design. Each student performed four exercises that required basic microsurgical skills. A tailored questionnaire (Comparison Assessment Tool) was used to subjectively compare the two systems using a 5-point Likert scale. The time needed to perform each task was recorded. A post-intervention cross-sectional survey was conducted to assess the overall quality of the trial session. Results: The operating exoscope was preferred over the operating microscope by most of the students in all items of the Comparison Assessment Tool, particularly with regard to “focusing” and “image quality” (n = 25, 92.6%). A significant difference between groups was found in two exercises that were easier to perform with the operating exoscope. Most of the students considered the overall quality of the evaluation experience to be “very good” (n = 25, 92.6%). Conclusions: The exoscope allows first-time users to better perform basic microsurgical tasks in a simulated clinical scenario compared to the operating microscope. Further prospective comparative studies will be needed to validate our preliminary findings in an actual clinical scenario.","PeriodicalId":387234,"journal":{"name":"Surgical Technology Online","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical Technology Online","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52198/22.sti.40.so1583","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The high-definition 3D operating exoscope is a new tool for surgical visualization and magnification that was designed to replace the operating microscope. However, the paucity of studies that have prospectively compared the two systems has made it difficult to draw clear recommendations. The purpose of this study was to compare the operating exoscope and the operating microscope in first-time users in a pre-clinical setting. Methods: Twenty-eight consecutive medical students were prospectively enrolled and randomized in a crossover design. Each student performed four exercises that required basic microsurgical skills. A tailored questionnaire (Comparison Assessment Tool) was used to subjectively compare the two systems using a 5-point Likert scale. The time needed to perform each task was recorded. A post-intervention cross-sectional survey was conducted to assess the overall quality of the trial session. Results: The operating exoscope was preferred over the operating microscope by most of the students in all items of the Comparison Assessment Tool, particularly with regard to “focusing” and “image quality” (n = 25, 92.6%). A significant difference between groups was found in two exercises that were easier to perform with the operating exoscope. Most of the students considered the overall quality of the evaluation experience to be “very good” (n = 25, 92.6%). Conclusions: The exoscope allows first-time users to better perform basic microsurgical tasks in a simulated clinical scenario compared to the operating microscope. Further prospective comparative studies will be needed to validate our preliminary findings in an actual clinical scenario.
高清晰度三维外窥镜和手术显微镜的临床前比较:一项前瞻性随机交叉研究
目的:高清晰度三维手术外窥镜是一种取代手术显微镜的新型手术可视化和放大工具。然而,由于缺乏前瞻性比较这两种系统的研究,因此很难提出明确的建议。本研究的目的是比较手术外窥镜和手术显微镜的首次用户在临床前设置。方法:前瞻性连续入组28名医学生,采用交叉设计随机分组。每个学生都做了四个需要基本显微外科技术的练习。采用量身定制的问卷(比较评估工具),采用5分李克特量表对两个系统进行主观比较。记录了执行每项任务所需的时间。进行干预后横断面调查以评估试验的整体质量。结果:大多数学生在比较评估工具的所有项目中,特别是在“聚焦”和“图像质量”方面,更倾向于使用外窥镜而不是操作显微镜(n = 25, 92.6%)。两组之间的显著差异被发现在两个练习中,更容易与操作外窥镜进行。大多数学生认为评价体验的整体质量“非常好”(n = 25, 92.6%)。结论:与手术显微镜相比,外窥镜允许首次使用者在模拟临床场景中更好地执行基本的显微外科手术任务。需要进一步的前瞻性比较研究来验证我们在实际临床场景中的初步发现。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信